A Fine Line Between Governance and Terrorism

Smuggling weapons--arms trafficking--has long been argued as an act of war or an act of terrorism, whether we're discussing Iran's various attempts to provide weapons of war to those fighting the U.S. and Israel, the German submarine U20's sinking of the Lusitania for smuggling 4.2 million rounds of small arms ammunition, or the Obama Administration's smuggling of thousands of weapons to drug cartels locked in a a mortal struggle with the government of Mexico.

As a matter of fact, U.S. federal law would seem to define Operation Fast and Furious as an act of international terrorism:

As used in this chapter—
(1) the term “international terrorism” means activities that—
  (A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
  (B) appear to be intended—
        (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
        (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
        (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
  (C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum;

Operation Fast and Furious seems to have violated multiple federal laws, including the Arms Export Control Act.

More to the point of terrorism, the gun-walking occurred within the United States and knowingly involved allowing weapons to transition an international border with Mexico in order to "intimidate or coerce" Mexico's embattled civilian population and civil government.

Another apparent goal was to influence the policy of U.S. gun laws by coercion (actual ATF implementation of multiple long-gun reporting, asserted attempt to create conditions for a U.S. weapons ban).

Last but not least, Operation Fast and Furious (and contemporary programs) seem designed to affect the conduct of the government of Mexico by providing mass destruction in the form of thousands of firearms used typically used for assassination and kidnapping, and the conduct of the government of the United States by lending anecdotal credence to President Obama's 90-percent lie and trump up support for attacks on the Second Amendment.

Governed by this definition provided in Title 18 of U.S. Code, there is every reason to state that Gunwalker is international terrorism sponsored from the highest levels of appointed and elected officials within the executive branch of the administration of President Barack Obama.

No wonder they want to close Gitmo. As terrorists, that is precisely where they belong.

Choi to Re-enlist

Good for him, and good for the country:

More than two years after former infantry officer Daniel Choi came out on a talk show as a gay service member – an event that led to his discharge - the Iraq war veteran says he will re-enlist in the U.S. Army following Tuesday's repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

"Going back to the military will be a vindication," Choi told POLITICO. [I'm] going back because I fought to go back. The seriousness of our claims was not just political theatre – it was really drawn from our lives. I sacrificed so much so I could go back."

I think anyone who is willing to make the sacrifices and serve their nation in the military should be able to, and that's about it. Gays have always been in the military, and I for one am proud to live in a nation where honorable men and women can now openly serve.

Mike Adds:

The problem with this, as well as similarly controversial social dilemmas occurs when people identify themselves primarily by their preferences rather than their duty or nationality. I have far less concern for a soldier who happens to be gay than for a gay soldier. I have no worries about a lawyer who happens to be black, female or gay, but I'm always concerned about a black lawyer or a feminist lawyer or a gay lawyer because they see the law as a means of forcing others to accept their preferences. Similarly, I'm glad to accept any American who happens to be Hispanic, Armenian, etc., but "Hispanic-Americans" or any other hyphenated type, tend to be worrisome.

A soldier who happens to be gay might reasonably never be known to be gay any more than a soldier fond of any other sexual practice. Spare me the "gayness is my identity" meme. If you enlist or accept a commission in the armed services, your identify is that of soldier, sailor, airman or marine. Everything else is secondary.

As Bob has suggested, gay people have indeed served honorably, but they have done so because they have served, first, foremost and always, as soldiers. Being gay was not an issue for them because they were wise enough not to make it an issue so as not to interfere with their--and the military's--mission.

Update (Bob): I should have research more on Choi before commenting on his reenlistment. To put it mildly, his behavior has been controversial and he apparently wasn't a good officer when he did serve.

That now understood, I affirm my support of those who serve... but really wonder if Choi himself should be allowed back in.

These Guys Won?

Look closely at the following photograph currently on the Fox News home page, showing Libyan rebel fighters.

Now look even more closely at the dufus on the right.

I've never been in the military (or even played a soldier on television), but even I know that a rocket-propelled grenade loaded in the ass-end of a launcher isn't a threat to anyone.

Seriously... these guys beat Qaddafi?

Libyan Rebels Claim Qaddafi Compound Breached

I'll believe it when we have confirmation, but it seems plausible.

[Updated 11:39 a.m. ET, 5:39 p.m. in Libya] Rebels are saying they have made it into Gadhafi's Bab Al Aziza compound, CNN's Sara Sidner reported.

"They have been able to take some of the weapons off of the Gadhafi forces," she said.

Rebels are telling Sidner "Gadhafi is nearly finished."

Sidner said that rebels said they are still inside trying to secure the area, but are celebrating as fighting continues.

“Now they’re going to try and clear the compound," Sidner said rebels told her.

Sidner said that she is less than half a kilometer from the compound and can see more smoke coming from the area.

Sidner said rebels are hugging each other and crying on the streets. Loud chants can be heard in the background.

Rebels shouted "God is great, God is great" in celebration Tuesday.

The compound is symbol of the regime, and an important one, but only a symbol. Until they capture or kill Qaddafi and his sons, the fighting will likely continue.

Libyan Regime Goes Dead Parrot

Michael Palin, John Cleese, and Moammar Qaddafi

Rebels control most of Tripoli and have captured his two oldest sons, and it seems a foregone conclusion that the 42-year dictatorship of Moammar Qaddafi is finished, despite the Baghdad Bob protests of his few remaining supporters who hope against hope that the regime is just "pining for the fjords."

The location of the ex-dictator (I think it safe to call him an "ex" when he controls less than 20% of his own capitol) is anyone's guess, and it appears everyone is guessing, from supposing his death (inaccurately, so far), to thinking he's holed up in a strongpoint in Tripoli, to those who feel he has fled to neighboring Algeria, or even to South America.

Predictably, President Obama's supporters are crowing that Qaddafi's downfall is a victory and a feather in the cap of the President.

I say give Obama all the credit possible for what he actually did.

He pledged military and intelligence support to a popular preexisting coalition of primarily Western European forces.

He authorized the U.S. military to use air power, and then reined them in so that their effectiveness was diminished, prolonging the conflict.

Obama joined a victorious coalition, but certainly did not lead it. Give him the credit he deserves for putting a finger in the wind and following popular opinion. Just don't dare claim it amounts to anything remotely like leadership.

Beyond that, let us hope that the various rebel forces that will be vying for control of Libya are a bit less extremist than the dictator they replace. The Libyan people deserve better.

Qadaffi Dead (or not?)... But what next?

Allahpundit is updating so fast I can't keep up with it but the gist of it is that instead of a siege of Tripoli, the various rebel grouping surging into the city are finding that regime loyalists have simply melted away.

As noted in the headline various voices on Twitter are claiming the strongman is dead. If he isn't, and he's in Tripoli, he most likely will be soon if he isn't now.

It is amazing how a bunch of ragtag rebels with no discernible organization can overthrown a firmly entrenched tyrant that started this war with total control of the government and military. Other dictators should look upon Libya with fear in their hearts.

Of course, this doesn't mean rainbows and sunshine for Libyans. We don't know who is going to take power in the suddenly leaderless state, or what their intentions are. The old dictator has fallen.

But what will we face now?

The Deadliest Day

An American special operations helicopter—most likely a CH-47—was downed last night in Afghanistan in the deadliest single incident of the Afghan war for American forces.

A military helicopter crashed in eastern Afghanistan, killing 31 U.S. special operation troops and seven Afghan commandos, the country's president said Saturday. An American official said it was apparently shot down, in the deadliest single incident for American forces in the decade-long war.

The Taliban claimed they downed the helicopter with rocket fire while it was taking part in a raid on a house where insurgents were gathered in the province of Wardak late Friday. It said wreckage of the craft was strewn at the scene.l

I think I can speak for both Mike and myself in offering our sincere prayers to the families of those lost, and for the souls of these brave warriors.

Godspeed.

Update: The majority of the dead are Navy SEALs from Team 6. The aircrew is probably from the Army's 160th SOAR, and the remainder of those killed were Afghan military. It is beginning to sound like a Taliban gunner got lucky with an RPG as the helicopter shortly after taking off as the mission was completing and the unit was exfiltrating.

Elements of Team 6 killed Osama bin Laden.

I would not be surprised at all if the RPG came from the Pakistani ISI.

Terror in Oslo: Religion of Pedophilia and Infantile Rage Strikes Again

There was a massive car bomb that shattered the facades of buildings around the Norwegian Prime Minister's office, and there are now unconfirmed reports of a gunman dressed as a police officer shooting up a youth camp outside the capitol, and other possible unexploded bombs in the city of Oslo.

The BBC is providing on-going coverage of what appears to be not just one, but a possible series of terror attacks.

And the obligatory Islamic tie-in:

The blast comes as Norway grapples with a homegrown terror plot linked to al-Qaida. Two suspects are in jail awaiting charges.

Last week, a Norwegian prosecutor filed terror charges against an Iraqi-born cleric for threatening Norwegian politicians with death if he is deported from the Scandinavian country. The indictment centered on statements that Mullah Krekar -- the founder of the Kurdish Islamist group Ansar al-Islam -- made to various news media, including American network NBC.

We can't outlaw a peaceful religion, but we sure as Hell can outlaw violent cults.

It's time we started working on making that happen.

Update: The claims of responsibility from the terror group have turned out to be bogus. It's a sick person in a sick cult who takes credit for something like this.

Details are sketchy, but it appears that the attacker is a native Norwegian and is responsible for both the bombing in Oslo and the shootings at the youth camp.

He is in police custody.

Update: The body count has skyrocketed to at least 84 on the island, and 91 overall.

Norwegian national broadcaster NRK identified the shooter as 32-year-old Anders Behring Breivik, and he is apparently an anti-Muslim right-wing extremist and Christian Fundamentalist. He is Norway's McVeigh.

Let the title of this article of this blog post be a warning not to jump to conclusions, even when the crime fits the M.O. and one terrorist group or another within the Islamic Death Cult claims responsibility.

The key difference to remember--while American liberals gloat over the wrong assumptions we made based upon initial claims--is that when so-called Christians embark on crimes of this nature, they are expressly violating one of the key tenants of our faith. When Muslims commit mass murder, they are typically following key tenants of their faith.

Big difference.

Regardless of the politically focused sideshow, my heartfelt sympathies extend to the families affected by this madman. Please send them your prayers.

Mumbai Bombed on Terrorist's Birthday

Three bombs. Nothing definitive on casualties yet, but initial reports indicate three killed and at least dozens wounded.

Rather obviously, the Religion of Peace/Cult of Death has struck again.

Obama Continues to Ignore Iran's Arming and Training of Shiite Militias as American Soldiers Die

American soldiers in Iraq are being attacked and killed with increasing sophisticated weapons provided by Iran, and the Obama Administration does nothing:

James F. Jeffrey, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, said Tuesday that fresh forensic testing on weapons used in the latest deadly attacks in the country bolsters assertions by U.S. officials that Iran is supporting Iraqi insurgents with new weapons and training.

"We're not talking about a smoking pistol. There is no doubt this is Iranian," Jeffrey said in an interview.

"We're seeing more lethal weapons, more accurate weapons, more longer-range weapons," Jeffrey added. "And we're seeing more sophisticated mobile and other deployment options, and we’re seeing better-trained people."

In some cases, insurgents made no effort to remove from the weapons identification numbers suggesting that they came from Iran, "which in itself is troubling," Jeffrey said.

Training is being provided by the Revolutionary Guards, which supports Shia terrorism worldwide.

A stern response in the form of a series of "accidents" at Iranian Revolutionary Guards bases or among IRG commanders might get Iranian attention, and if carefully targeted, could decapitate the leadership authorizing the attacks without overt war. It would be fighting Iran on its own terms, in the kind of guerilla warfare fighting Americans have excelled at since Major Benjamin Church led the first American ranger units in King Philips War a hundred years before we were an inkling of a nation.

We know how to defeat Iran at their own game. We simply need the political will to engage in this kind of conflict and win.

Of course, there doesn't seem to be the political will to counter Iran, and perhaps the President simply can't muster the outrage to attack kindred spirits.

We are, after all, talking about an Administration that has done nearly the same thing in arming Mexican narco-terrorists via the Department of Justice's Gunwalker program.

Idiot Obama Sets Out to Create Another War

Barack Obama finally found a Middle Eastern leader he wouldn't bow down to in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He also seems intent on empowering the militant Arabs surrounding Israel with the moral cover to start another war.

...Mr. Obama's problem isn't, as he supposes, that people aren't paying close enough attention to him. On the contrary, they've noticed that on Thursday Mr. Obama called for Israel to make territorial concessions to some approximation of the '67 lines before an agreement is reached on the existential issues of refugees and Jerusalem. "Moving forward now on the basis of territory and security," he said, "provides a foundation to resolve these two issues in a way that is just and fair, and that respects the rights and aspirations of Israelis and Palestinians."

Mr. Obama neglected to mention these points on Sunday, hence the telling omission. But the essence of his proposal is that Israel should cede territory, put itself into a weaker position, and then hope for the best. This doesn't even amount to a land-for-peace formula.

That's not all. Mr. Obama got some applause Sunday by calling for a "non-militarized" Palestinian state. But how does that square with his comment, presumably applicable to a future Palestine, that "every state has a right to self-defense"? Mr. Obama was also cheered for his references to Israel as a "Jewish state." But why then obfuscate on the question of Palestinian refugees, whose political purpose over 63 years has been to destroy Israel as a Jewish state?

Barack the Younger seems intend on creating the conditions for a modern round of Arab-Israeli wars, where it seems his favor lies with the bloodthirsty and genocidal Arabs.

I cannot for the life of me why he continues to stir up trouble for our allies, unless he doesn't consider himself to be on their side. Why, the next thing you know, he'll make statements that encourage the IRA.

Professional Idiot Ron Paul Would Not Have Authorized Bin Laden Mission

Proving yet again why this messiah to the dim and half-baked is simply unfit for the job he wants.

Ron Paul says he would not have authorized the mission that led to the death of Osama bin Laden, and that President Barack Obama should have worked with the Pakistani government instead of authorizing a raid.

"I think things could have been done somewhat differently," Paul said this week. "I would suggest the way they got Khalid [Sheikh] Mohammed. We went and cooperated with Pakistan. They arrested him, actually, and turned him over to us, and he's been in prison. Why can't we work with the government?"

Asked by WHO Radio's Simon Conway whether he would have given the go-ahead to kill bin Laden if it meant entering another country, Paul shot back that it "absolutely was not necessary."

"I don't think it was necessary, no. It absolutely was not necessary," Paul said during his Tuesday comments. "I think respect for the rule of law and world law and international law. What if he'd been in a hotel in London? We wanted to keep it secret, so would we have sent the airplane, you know the helicopters into London, because they were afraid the information would get out?"

The correct answer is damn right you send the Blackhawks into London, and fire on Britain's throngs of disloyal Bin Laden supporters if necessary.

What Ron Paul doesn't get—and will never get—is that it is easy to be an ideologue when you don't have any real responsibilities. Obama is being exposed to this reality the hard way, which is why he's been dragged kicking and screaming into many of the (correct) foreign policy and military decisions undertaken by his predecessors, despite his unrealistic campaign promises.

Chuck Schumer Proposes "No Ride" List for Amtrak

I'm pretty sure he didn't think this one all the way through:

A senator on Sunday called for a "no-ride list" for Amtrak trains after intelligence gleaned from the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound pointed to potential attacks on the nation's train system.

Sen. Charles Schumer said he would push as well for added funding for rail security and commuter and passenger train track inspections and more monitoring of stations nationwide.

"Circumstances demand we make adjustments by increasing funding to enhance rail safety and monitoring on commuter rail transit and screening who gets on Amtrak passenger trains, so that we can provide a greater level of security to the public," the New York Democrat said at a news conference.

As you would expect from a New york progressive, Schumer's "solution" is to throw hundreds of millions of dollars at a problem without solving it.

Any student of history has to be aware that while stations and the trains themselves are prime targets, the rail lines themselves are the weak link. During every major conflict from the mid 19th century onward, rail lines have been major targets for saboteurs, and those lines are nearly impossible to continuously monitor.

Terrorists do not need to enter a train station or get on a train to destroy the train; all they need to do is target an unguarded or just checked section of track with minimal explosives or even robust hand tools to cause a catastrophic derailment. Spending money we don't have to focus additional security resources on the part of the system that already has the most robust security measures is a fool's errand.

Further, Shumer assumes that passenger trains are the best target for catastrophic casualties, but the derailment of a chemical-laden freight train resulting in the rupture of caustic chemicals could lead to an incident on par with Bhopal.

If Schumer wants to provide the illusion of doing something worthwhile at great expense, he's certainly on the right path. But his farcical "no-ride" list will do nothing to save Americans lives.

Obama Honors SEALs That Killed Bin Laden

Fox News has the story:

President Obama has met with the assault forces who carried out the strike on Osama bin Laden and has awarded them a presidential citation.

The White House says the president, along with Vice President Joe Biden, met privately with the troops at Fort Campbell, Ky., to thank them for their service.

Obama met with the full assault force involved in the raid in Pakistan carried out by Navy SEALS and also with helicopter operators who got them there. He awarded the units involved a Presidential Unit Citation -- the highest such honor that can go to a military unit -- to recognize "extraordinary service and achievement."

In a show of respect, the special operations team presented President Obama with a rare unit patch to wear on his Commander-in-Chief's jacket, something I'm told has not been done for other recent Presidents.

al Qaeda Confirms that Bin Laden Sleeps with the Fishes

I guess this will make things a little harder on the conspiracy theorists, but only just a little bit.

Al Qaeda released a statement on jihadist forums Friday confirming the death of its leader, Osama bin Laden, according to SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors Islamist websites.

The development comes days after U.S. troops killed bin Laden in a raid on a compound in the Pakistani city of Abbottabad.

The statement, translated by SITE, lauded the late militant, threatened to take action against the United States, and urged Pakistanis to "rise up and revolt."

Bin Laden's death will serve as a "curse that chases the Americans and their agents, and goes after them inside and outside their countries," the message said.

"Soon -- with help from Allah -- their happiness will turn into sorrow, and their blood will be mixed with their tears," it said.

It appears the White House decision to go back on the precedent of publishing pictures of dead terrorists accomplished precisely nothing, which anyone could have predicted. Perhaps one day we'll one again elect a President that understands that you win wars by breaking the enemy ability and spirit to fight, not placating them.

Barack Obama is not that President.

Video Blackout on Bin Laden Raid? Not Likely.

Is anyone buying this?

Leon Panetta, director of the CIA, revealed there was a 25 minute blackout during which the live feed from cameras mounted on the helmets of the US special forces was cut off.

A photograph released by the White House appeared to show the President and his aides in the situation room watching the action as it unfolded. In fact they had little knowledge of what was happening in the compound.

In an interview with PBS, Mr Panetta said: "Once those teams went into the compound I can tell you that there was a time period of almost 20 or 25 minutes where we really didn't know just exactly what was going on. And there were some very tense moments as we were waiting for information.

"We had some observation of the approach there, but we did not have direct flow of information as to the actual conduct of the operation itself as they were going through the compound."

The video feeds of this op were likely transmitted via a drone circling overhead, an AWACS or similar aircraft in Afghanistan and another in the Arabian Sea, and surveillance satellites overhead. The odds that feeds from 79 operators, fed through multiple uplinks, was never seen or recorded simply isn't credulous.

Further, you'll note that Panetta chose his words very carefully. They did not have direct flow of information. That indicates that there were recording of the assault recorded on the flash-memory of helmet-mounted cameras, but these are just one more set of images—along with the three or more sets of photographs of Bin Laden's body—that the "most transparent Administration in history" refuses to show the American people.

Real Presidents Show Dead Terrorists

But then, nobody ever accused Barack Hussein Obama of being a real President.

GUTLESS

Barack Obama refuses to publish any of the death photos of Osama Bin Laden.

The decision confirms that Obama is weak and too deferential to the sensitivities of people who celebrated the murder of thousands of Americans on September 11, 2001, and who delighted in the beheading snuff films of Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg.

Barack Obama cares more about the opinions of terrorists than he does closure for the America people.

Screw him.

Bin Laden's Death Ultimately Means Little

For most Americans—including progressives that suddenly seem okay with violence directed at someone other than conservatives—Bin Laden's death was a source of both relief and satisfaction. At the same time, those of us grounded in reality—and some aren't—know that neither al Qaeda, nor the Taliban, nor greater Islam's barbaric normalism has suddenly ended because of one man's death.

Osama Bin Laden was just one of thousands of committed warlords in 1,400 years of Islamic history that dedicated his life to the destruction of all ideas that were not lock-step in line with his own. Islam has not been diminished by his death. It's constant bloodlust and history of oppression is not subdued as a result of his passing. Osama Bin Laden's death is just one of a millions that can attributed to the world's most violent death cult. He is merely one of the more recent martyrs.

The war between good and evil, light and dark, the rest of the world and Islam, will continue.

There can be no peace as long as Islam exists. Every second of their history since 632 AD confirms that sad fact. You cannot "coexist" with evil.

You kill it, or it kills you.

And so the war continues.

Final Photo Of Osama Bin Laden

Appropriately enough, the last words ever said to him were, "What's up, chum?"

Bin Laden Death Photo?

A picture of a dead Osama bin Laden. AFP, via Yahoo.

Caption reads:

Iraqis watch a news broadcast on Al-Arabiya showing an image which allegedly shows the body of Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden. The killing of bin Laden by US forces at a palatial villa near the capital Islamabad has raised fresh questions over Pakistan's loyalties in the war against Al-Qaeda. (AFP/Sabah Arar)

Update: Image Al-Arabiya is showing may have been Photo-shopped according to commenter (see below). I wouldn't be that surprised.

Confirmed a fake.

The U.S. government almost certainly had video cameras recording every second of the raid from satellite, drones, helicopters, and SEAL team member helmet-mounted sources. They also must have still photos from the scene and on-board ship where his DNA was drawn for confirmation and his body was buried at sea.

This confirming information must be made public, While most rational people will find the claims of his death credible, there are a significant number—particularly among his supporters and sympathizers—who will refuse to admit his death if not dramatically shown otherwise with concrete proof. In this day and age, photos and videos still trump DNA tests that people in many parts of the world don't understand or trust.

Show us his corpse, or the conspiracy theorists will have a field day with their rumors.

Hidden By Pakistan, Osama Bin Laden Killed

Justice served.

Bin Laden's hideout was a custom-built home 100 yards from one of Pakistan's elite military academy. That nation obviously was aware of the hideout and was harboring the world's most wanted terrorist... for how long we have not been told. They have a lot to answer for, and all U.S. funding to that nation needs to stop NOW until we learn just how complicit they were.

Update: Bert still on the run.

Oh, For a New AVG

As speculation leaks out this morning that Syria aircraft and ground troops may be fighting Libyan rebels on behalf of Qaddafi's dictatorship, it makes me wonder how many lives might eventually be saved if there was a way for forming something like the American Volunteer Group that fought for the Chinese in world War II. You probably know them better as the Flying Tigers.

With the cost of today's 4th and now 5th generation jet fighters there is no reasonable expectation of a volunteer force fighting a direct air-to-air war against modern (or nearly modern) fighters, but even a single squadron of generation's old close-air support and observation aircraft could bring this conflict to a quicker and hopefully less costly end. Modern piston-drive COIN aircraft such as the Hawker Beechcraft AT-6 or the EMB-314 Super Tucano could level the playing field for the rebels, as they are more than capable of taking on the improvised gun trucks and tanks of Qaddafi's loyalists and mercenaries, and quite frankly, could probably do so with a bit more accuracy (and collateral damage) than the jet aircraft the dictator's forces have been using.

The AT-6 is even familiar to many pilots; the trainer version of the plane is the primary trainer the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy pilots and the pilots of 19 other nations.

Like the original AVG, the pilots and ground crews of this theoretical group would be made up of men that volunteered to serve, flying planes loaned to the besieged rebels. At or near the end of the conflict, with the tables decisively turned, the aircraft could be returned to their originating nations or "donated" to the new government for oil.

I know that the odds of any nation loaning the Libyan rebels aircraft and crews is almost non-existent, but I have to wonder ho many lives might be saved and how much shorter the conflict would be if this relatively modest investment (in military terms) could be used to break what increasingly looks like a bloody and protracted stalemate that may cost thousands of lives.

NATO Helicopters Kill Nine Afghan Boys Collecting Firewood

This really confuses me and pisses me off.

Which nation's helicopters were responsible for this attack, and if American Apache gunships, where was the target discrimination? We've spent hundreds of millions for state-of-the-art sensors that can cut through darkness and fog, and none of that technology was able to tell that these children were carrying firewood, and not weapons?

I don't need to be told there is a fog of war, but we seem to be repeating this kind of mistaken identity every few months. You can't win a counterinsurgency like this.

Good grief.

Bradley Manning Faces Possible Death Penalty

The treasonous weasel deserves nothing more than a fair trail and a fair execution.

The Army on Wednesday filed 22 new charges against Pfc. Bradley Manning, accused of illegally downloading tens of thousands of classified U.S. military and State Department documents that were then publicly released by WikiLeaks, military officials told NBC News. The most serious of the new charges is "aiding the enemy," a capital offense that could carry a potential death sentence.

Pentagon and military officials say some of the classified information released by WikiLeaks contained the names of informants and others who had cooperated with U.S. military forces in Afghanistan, endangering their lives.

What Manning deserves and what he gets, however, could be two vastly different things. The overwhelming preponderance of evidence is that Bradley Manning is guilty; no one actually argues Manning isn't absolutely guilty of disclosing hundreds of thousands of files. Some extremists are trying to manufacture whistleblower status for the imprisoned leaker, but the simple fact is that Manning ignored the established protocols whistleblowers have that would have afforded him protection, and instead intentionally decided to attempt to damage U.S. military and foreign policy.

Others may chose to scapegoat Manning's sexuality, but I find that unfair to the legion of gay servicemen and women that served this nation honorably over the history of the Republic.

Manning is a traitor to his nation and his service who intentionally put the lives of U.S. citizens and allies at risk. He is an information terrorist. No amount of spin by left wing zealots can spin that ugly truth away.

Time for Naval, Air Strikes Against Pirates in Somalia

Four Americans on a private yacht captured by Somali pirates have been killed by their captors. News is understandably sketchy at this point, but it appears that at least some of the pirates may have been engaged by U.S. naval forces that were shadowing the vessel after the murders.

The international community has allowed pirates to operate off Somalia for far too long, and has done nothing to eradicate the threat.

While pirates operate off the coast, the simple fact of the matter is that they cannot exist without a support structure onshore. These pirate havens are well known to the governments of the world, and poorly defended. Bombardment from the air or sea could easily reduce the pirate strongholds to rubble, sink the "motherships" that pirates use to extend their range offshore, and of course, eliminate the pirates themselves.

Among this nation's first foreign policy decisions were two small wars (the Barbary Wars) against African pirates. Piracy that had existed for centuries in the region came to a halt only when overwhelming force was brought to bear. Two hundred years later, the same motivations encourage the pirates of Somalia, and only the same forceful response can end the modern age of African piracy.

Such a campaign can easily be won with minimal or even non-existent U.S. casualties. It merely remains to be seen if the Obama Administration will decide to stand for American interests, or instead remain ever deferential to any thuggish entity that claims Islam for its inspiration.

WMDs? What WMDs?

So either this San Diego Customs and Border Patrol agent is a full-on loony, or WMDs have been intercepted entering our nations ports.

I rather suspect that Al Hallor, the assistant port director/CBP officer that made these comments is simply being shockingly candid. We know that terrorist groups would love to use WMDs inside America, and that plots have been uncovered around the world where terrorist groups have attempted to acquire nuclear weapons, radiological material, and both chemical and biological weapons. Sooner or later an attempt would be made to bring it into our nation, and I'm not surprised at all that some were intercepted.

Quite frankly, I would be shocked if attempts to use WMDs within the US have already made it past our borders and have been tried, but failed. As easy as it is to smuggle in millions of illegal aliens and thousands of tons of drugs each year over our virtually undefended borders with Mexico and Canada, it is only logical to suspect WMDs have already made it into this nation.

Getting them here is only part of the battle. Deploying them effectively is another matter entirely.

Napolitano's Focus On Molesting Grandmothers in Airports Is Letting Iranian Suicide Bombers Slip Across Our Southern Border

Or at least that is in one inference that can be made by this story out of Arizona:

A book celebrating suicide bombers has been found in the Arizona desert just north of the U.S.- Mexican border, authorities tell Fox News.

The book, "In Memory of Our Martyrs," was spotted Tuesday by a U.S. Border Patrol agent out of the Casa Grande substation who was patrolling a route known for smuggling illegal immigrants and drugs.

Published in Iran, it consists of short biographies of Islamic suicide bombers and other Islamic militants who died carrying out attacks.

According to internal U.S. Customs and Border Protection documents, "The book also includes letters from suicide attackers to their families, as well as some of their last wills and testaments." Each biographical page contains "the terrorist's name, date of death, and how they died."

Perhaps the most asinine claim made in the article is a blatant lie by a unnamed DHS spokesman:

"At this time, DHS does not have any credible information on terrorist groups operating along the Southwest border," a Department of Homeland Security official said in a statement.

Rep. Sue Myrick (R-NC) called upon DHS to investigate Hezbollah's actions along the U.S.-Mexican border in June of last year.

The mainstream media, investment magazines, and even political think tanks have been writing about the issue as long ago as 2009, and rumors of US covert action against Islamic terrorist groups in Mexico and other Central and South America countries dates back even further.

Is DHS really expecting us to believe that the border they refuse to protect isn't the easiest and most logical infiltration route for terrorists, just as it is for cartels?

We will see the Mexican border shut iron-tight in a matter of days after the next massive terrorist strike in this nation is linked to terrorists waltzing into this nation, armed to the teeth as they did in Mumbai.

When that happens, I hope the American citizenry holds the political class (both parties) responsible, and puts those responsible for allowing this to happen in prison where they belong.

.308 Winchester/7.62 NATO Outlawed by Iraq for PMCs?

I just had a very interesting phone with a defense contractor, who informed me that the Iraqi government just passed a law that outlaws the use of .308 Winchester/7.62 rifles in Iraq by private military contractors.

As a result, overwatch teams that have been using rifles chambered in this caliber for counter-sniper roles are going to have to find other long-range calibers that meet the standards of Iraqi law. I have no idea if this affects 7.62 machine guns as well.

Why has this been done? I have absolutely no idea, and cannot find the first mention of this in the MSM or military media at this time. There is the possibility that this is a false alarm or miscommunication of some sort, but if it is, it is a miscommunication serious enough that PMCs are reaching out for alternative weapons.

I'll update if I learn any more.

12/20 Update: This doesn't appear to be a "law" as such, but perhaps a directive or "suggestion." I can get my hands on the language, but it appears that the intent it to require counter-sniper weapons to be chambered in 5.56, something similar to a Mk 12.

Considering much of the PMC work and Iraqi population is contained in urban areas with high population densities, it makes sense to reduce the risk of over-penetrating or off-target bullets to nearby civilians, and the reduced range is probably mitigated by the reality of reduced lines of sight anyway (that is purely speculative, btw).

All things considered, this seems to be a pretty logical request, does it not?

The Handy-Dandy, All-Purpose Entrapment Defense

On December 8, Muhammed Hussein--Antonio Martinez before his conversion to Islam--was arrested by the FBI. But why? Was the evil FBI engaging in racist, anti-Muslim profiling? Not unless one considers arresting Hussein after he actually tried to detonate a bomb which was, thankfully, an FBI supplied fake, at a Baltimore County military recruiting facility to be racist, anti-Muslim profiling.

This is yet another in a series of good catches on the part of law enforcement, catches wherein dedicated, home-grown jihadists, have been discovered and intercepted before they could actually kill innocent Americans on American soil. This is the good news. The bad news is that, as always, we have to be lucky every time and everywhere, and the jihadists have to be lucky only once and only here and there. This situation also illuminates a danger to which America is uniquely susceptible due to, as usual, politically correct good intentions. I’ll explore that danger and an effective, easily implemented fix to largely remove it as a danger in a multi-part series in the near future, but for this post, the issue raised by Hussein and his supporters is: Entrapment.

Entrapment is a term much bandied about, particularly by common criminals, defense attorneys, creatures of the left, community activists and organizers and increasingly, by jihadists. It’s an easy charge to make and one easily believed because most Americans don’t know what it actually is. Even the always annoying and often disgusting Geraldo Rivera--he of the Snidely Whiplash mustache--joined in the entrapment game, perhaps because of a race-based knee-jerk reflex toward defending Hispanic criminals. Appearing on the O’Reily Factor shortly after Hussein’s arrest, Rivera sagely observed that Hussein/Martinez was “just a gullible youngster,” and of course, accused the FBI of entrapment. Hussein, by the way, is 21.

The ‘Lectric Law Library provides a useful, and quite commonly understood, definition of entrapment (here):

“A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit.”

The LLE also provides a useful, commonly understood, three part test to determine if entrapment has occurred:

“- First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.

- Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving him the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as persuading him to commit the crime.

- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.”

In plain English, if someone is inclined to kill innocents in furtherance of Jihad, and the police merely provide the opportunity for that person to act on their clearly professed desires, no entrapment has occurred. Despite the howls of outrage of civil liberties types to the contrary this makes perfect sense; it is absolutely how the police should conduct business.

In the case of Muhammed Hussein, the facts are clear: He came to the attention of the FBI after posting on his Facebook page calls to commit violence against non-Muslims and expressing his hatred for infidels (non-Muslims). The FBI made contact with Hussein through an informant and rapidly determined that he was not just a loud mouthed blowhard with no homicidal intent, but a genuine, home-grown jihadist who was quite serious in his deadly desires. Unless one is willing to say that investigating such a person is a violation of their First Amendment rights and that the mere process of determining their intent amounts to harassment or entrapment, then the FBI did exactly what should and must be expected of them. The alternative is that law enforcement officers must ignore potentially deadly threats in favor of waiting until after bombs explode in the midst of innocents.

What is known of this case suggests that the FBI conducted a textbook, completely legal and honorable, sting. The idea for committing Jihad came from Hussein who announced his intent to the world. The FBI did not talk him into committing the crime and in fact, carefully and on multiple occasions, recorded Hussein expressing his murderous intent, intent that he was more than ready and willing to act upon if only he had the means, means supplied by the FBI. The FBI made such recordings over time because an attorney working an entrapment defense will try to show that their client was, as Rivera suggested, “just a gullible youngster,” minding his own business until the police--who apparently have unlimited time and resources to waste persecuting random citizens--came along and coerced him into trying to blow up a military recruiting center. In this, as in most such cases, the defendant’s own words--as well as his actions--will serve to convict him.

Once again, our security services were not only very good, but lucky, and Americans are alive because of their dedication and skill. Those who cry “entrapment” in such cases, whether media personalities or Congressmen, willfully put themselves on the side of those who would gladly kill us all. We would be well served to remember their names.

WikiLeaks is Now A Terrorist Organization

I've been critical of WikiLeaks in the past for several reasons, from the fact that they are pursuing a clear political agenda designed to harm the United States to the highly inflammatory language and distorted context of some of the illicitly garnered information under their control.

I've also been quite clear that I consider Bradley Manning one of worse traitor's in American history (easily the worst in terms of volume) who deserves nothing less than the death penalty for passing along classified information during wartime.

I've been a bit more forgiving of Julian Assange, the glory-hounding promoter and leader of Wikileaks, and of Americans invovled with Wikileaks, but now that I've read of their "Doomsday device" containing unredacted information that assuredly will put lives in danger, I view the group—and individuals in possession of the file who intend to release it—as nothing more or less than information terrorists, and urge that our military, intelligence, and law enforcement assets treat them as such.

At over 1.4GB of information, the NSA and other federal agencies should have no problem identifying and tracking who has downloaded the file, the release of which constitutes a clear and present danger to the United States. All overt official and covert extrajudicial remedies should be authorized by the President to reacquire control over this information.

This is classified information that enemies of our nation are threatening to use against us during wartime, risking the lives of our soldiers and operatives worldwide. They should be hunted with the same vigor as al Qaeda, and offered the same mercies if they resist.

Heavy Metal Moves to the 'Stan

There is a steady escalation of force occurring in Afghanistan, though it seems few in this country realize the pressure being brought to bear. The volume of precision air-delivered munitions has been steadily increasing. The Army has now brought in a handful of futuristic XM25 25mm grenade launchers for field (combat) testing, and if they perform as well as hoped, additional XM25s are assured for wider deployment. On top of that, the Army is introducing a company of M1 Abrams main battle tanks to the conflict for the first time in the nice-year war, with the goal of using the 120mm main gun to crack open Taliban safe houses and fighting positions.

The Abrams will likely excel in Afghanistan as it has in the other environments in which it has been used, but the mil-geek in me wonders if the Stryker-variants armed with 120mm mortars (which have seen use in Iraq, but I don't know about Afghanistan) or the 105mm Mobile Gun variant (still in testing?) wouldn't be a better option for many Afghan missions because of their relative stealth and mobility advantages.

In any event, it appears the Taliban are in for a vicious fight.

Profiteering from the Sheep

Joshua Rhett Miller has made a rather disgusting display of bad journalism on FoxNews.com today, in an article about the TSA's invasive news passenger screening program that either irradiates passengers or results in their sexual assault by TSA employees.

In an apparent effort to buttress the TSA position, Miller goes to Carie Lemack and Mary and Frank Fetchet for their opinions. None of the three are air security professionals, bomb techs or terrorism experts. Their only uniting thread is that they had relatives killed as passengers on planes on 9/11.

This is nothing more or less than a false appeal to authority, as if traumatic loss granted security expertise or insights. The Fetchets and LeMack have no special knowledge. Their opinions are no more relevant to a discussion of air security than is a Kalahari bushman's.

We're plagued by incompetence in Homeland Security, and journalists like Miller are clouding the issue by asking the unqualified for advice.

Neither the millimeter-wave or backscatter X-ray technologies increase security for air passengers, anymore than does taking off your shoes, surrendering corkscrews or nail files, or reducing the size of your mouthwash bottles. All of these are gimmicks developed to give the impression that authorities are making us safer, even as the real gaping holes in air security remain as wide-open as they always have been.

Anyone could walk through the most advanced millimeter-wave or backscatter X-ray machines on the market with enough explosives to down an airliner. This isn't up for debate. It is an unassailable fact.

Homeland Security is spending hundreds of millions of dollars because Janet Napolitano likes to pretend she is worth her salary, while former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff turns a tidy profit from the machines themselves. It isn't about your safety. It's about profiting from your fear, and with something around 80% buying the government's claims, it appears they are succeeding.

Baa. Baa. Baa.

Among Jackals

If one studies the psychological disease known as the "Palestinian cause," revulsion is the only natural response. This is a culture that draws its entire premise for existence from plotting genocide against Jews and eradicating Israel from the map. If you think this is hyperbole you only need read the charters of the terrorist groups that run Palestinian life, sample some of the vile propaganda that they feel their children as television programming, or simply watch how they use their own poisoned young without regard to life or limb, as this video shows.

Watch it once, and you'll notice the rabid attack of a small car by a gang of Palestinian youths. They charge directly into traffic on a narrow street, and one of the junior terrorists is hurled through the air as the drive simply lacks the time to stop as the mob converges.

Watch the video a second time, and you'll note that the rock-throwing monsters are being directed and filmed by Palestinian adults including not less than a half-dozen "journalists" with high end digital still cameras and video cameras to capture the staged event from every angle.

Watch the video a third time, and you suddenly realize that the child getting hit was purposefully orchestrated... in fact, it was required. The Palestinian adults chose a bottleneck in the road where the driver had no room to avoid the children, and that the attack took place on a sharp curve, where he could not see the attack in advance and avoid it.

The children themselves converge from all directions, focused on a spot in front of the car. These Palestinian children were purposefully sent into traffic in the hopes that one or more of them would get hit by a car driven by an Israeli so that they could use the tightly cropped and controlled images to generate more anti-Israeli propaganda.

Think about the kind of people who would send their children into on-coming traffic in hopes they are struck down, and tell me that kind of mindset is something with which you can negotiate.

An Affront from Now to 9/11, to the Shores of Tripoli

Remember when Air Force One buzzed Manhattan for a photo op and spread terror among New York City, still (understandably) sensitive of careening airliners because of 9/11?

The Prince of Snides shows that kind of sensitivity again.

But let me be clear: as a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are. The writ of our Founders must endure.

The Won cites Jefferson's views of religious tolerance... accidentally underscoring the fact that the United States has been fighting against militant Islam since the very founding of our nation.

This is also the same Thomas Jefferson who said:

"[a] strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means."

We are led—and I use that term with all due reservation—by a would-be ruling class that repeatedly bows in supplication instead of celebrating American exceptionalism. Our current President is just the latest feckless example of that spineless mold.

There are rights, and there are rights. Mass murderers never have the right to prance and pose over the remains of their victims. If Barack Obama doesn't understand that, he simply is not fit to be President, and is barely worthy of being called a citizen.

Congressman: Execute Manning if Guilty

What else needs to be said?

Republican Rep. Mike Rogers, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, told a local radio station on Monday that the charges against Pvt. Bradley Manning are worthy of capital punishment.

"We know for a fact that people will likely be killed because of this information being disclosed," he told Michigan-based WHMI. "That's pretty serious. If they don't charge him with treason, they ought to charge him with murder.

"I argue the death penalty clearly should be considered here," he said. "He clearly aided the enemy to what may result in the death of U.S. soldiers . . . If that is not a capital offense, I don't know what is."

That Bradley Manning may have committed treason because of his politics (he's apparently a huge Rachel Maddow and Media Matters fan) just makes me hope he's given a longer rope at the gallows.

Blue Falcon Bradley Manning Confirmed As Primary Suspect in Wikileaks Afghan Doc DumpAfghan

So tell me, gentle readers... when is the last time a member of the armed forces disgraced his uniform, his fellow servicemen, our allies, and his country this much? He's the anti-Audie Murphy.

The Pentagon is focusing on jailed Army Pfc. Bradley Manning as the main suspect in the leak of tens of thousands of secret U.S. military documents related to the war in Afghanistan, a senior Pentagon official told CNN Wednesday.

Manning, 22, is believed to have accessed a worldwide military classified Internet and e-mail system to download tens of thousands of documents, according to the official, who did not want to be identified because of the ongoing criminal investigation of the soldier.

Breaking: Second Missing Sailor in Afghanistan Found Dead

No details yet, or any indication whether he was killed in the initial ambush, or later. Will update as more information comes in.

Let's Try Bradley Manning for Treason

I was wrong.

The Afghan War documents published by Julian Assange and Wikileaks aren't just a compendium of old news. It also includes the names of Afghan nationals that have been trying to help defeat the Taliban, and now puts hundreds of lives at risk.

One specific example cited by the paper is a report on an interview conducted by military officers of a potential Taliban defector. The militant is named, along with his father and the village in which they live.

"The leaks certainly have put in real risk and danger the lives and integrity of many Afghans," a senior official at the Afghan foreign ministry told The Times on condition of anonymity. "The U.S. is both morally and legally responsible for any harm that the leaks might cause to the individuals, particularly those who have been named. It will further limit the U.S./international access to the uncensored views of Afghans."

One former intelligence official told the paper that the Taliban could launch revenge attacks on "traitors" in the coming days.

The real suspected traitor in this mess is U.S. Army Private Bradley Manning, the analyst who bragged to a white hat hacker that he had stolen over a quarter-million military and diplomatic documents and sent them to WikiLeaks. Manning was taken into custody earlier this year after being fingered by the military as the source of the Apache gun camera footage Assange turned into a propaganda film called "Collateral Murder" that Assange used for fund-raising and not a little self-promotion. Manning is also the primary and obvious suspected leaker of these documents, which may be part of the $250,000 he stole.

I argued back in June that Manning should be charged with treason. If he is found to be the source of those documents, his only choice should be between rope, bullets, or a needle.

Winning Hearts And Minds? What About Half-Credit?

A squad of soldiers is given orders to go out and capture a high-value terrorist target in the mountains of Afghanistan. During a firefight, the target is killed, but the combat rages around them, and they are unable to retrieve the body for identification.

One of the soldiers improvises... and may now face charges. I don't see why.

After all, he kept his head:

Just picture the scene as a soldier returns from hunting an arch-enemy. Commanding officer: 'Did you get him?' Soldier: 'Yes, sir.' Commanding officer: 'Are you sure?' Soldier: 'Yes, sir.' Soldier reaches into rucksack and places severed head on table.

Commanding officer: ' ****!' If it happened in a Hollywood movie, the audience would either laugh or applaud. But there was no laughter the other day when this happened for real in Babaji, Afghanistan, current posting for the 1st Battalion, Royal Gurkha Rifles.

The precise circumstances will not be determined until an official report has been completed, but reliable military sources have confirmed that a Gurkha patrol was sent out with orders to track down a Taliban warlord described as a 'high-value target'.

Having identified their target, a fierce battle ensued during which the warlord was killed. To prove that they had got their man, the Gurkhas attempted to remove the body for identification. Further enemy fire necessitated a fast exit minus corpse. So, an unnamed soldier drew his kukri - the standard-issue Gurkha knife - removed the man's head and legged it.

The Afghans are horrified, and the spineless British, of course, seem intent on punishing the soldier for doing his job to the best of his ability.

Was the beheading barbaric? Did it horrify the Afghans, and strike fear into the hearts of the Taliban and al Qaeda?

Good.

The idea of "winning their hearts and minds" is wonderful, in theory, but striking fear into the hearts of your enemy and those who would aide them is a tactic that has been just as effective throughout history.

Let the Taliban sweat.

Body of One Missing Sailor Recovered in Afghanistan

He apparently was the sailor killed during the the capture attempt. The second sailor is presumed captured, as the Taliban has claimed. the Taliban hopes to use him as leverage in a prisoner exchange.

There is still no word publicly on why the men left their base alone.

Taliban Claims Two U.S. Soldiers Captured

And worse than the often exaggerated claims of the Taliban, ISAF confirms that two soldiers have gone missing.

"Two International Security Assistance Force service members departed their compound in Kabul City in a vehicle on Friday afternoon and did not return," ISAF said in a brief statement.

"The unit dispatched vehicles and rotary-winged assets to search for them and their vehicle, and the search is ongoing."

The obvious questions is, of course, why did two soldiers leave their base without being part of a larger unit? There is something more than a little suspicious about the circumstances. Hopefully they'll be recovered alive and their COs will be able to question them about that.

Eco-Friendly Terrorist Killing

Environmentally-conscious jihadists will be thrilled to discover that the U.S. Army will now be now be shooting at them with "green" ammunition:

The Army announced today it has begun shipping its new 5.56mm cartridge, the M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round, to support warfighters in Afghanistan.

The new M855A1 round is sometimes referred to as "green ammo."

The new round replaces the current M855 5.56mm cartridge that has been used by U.S. troops since the early 1980s.

The M855A1 resulted in a number of significant enhancements not found in the current round, officials said. They explained these include improved hard-target capability, more dependable, consistent performance at all distances, improved accuracy, reduced muzzle flash and a higher velocity.

During testing, the M855A1 performed better than current 7.62mm ball ammunition against certain types of targets, blurring the performance differences that previously separated the two rounds.

The projectile incorporates these improvements without adding weight or requiring additional training.

According to Lt. Col. Jeffrey K. Woods, the program's product manager, the projectile is "the best general purpose 5.56mm round ever produced."

"The best general purpose 5.56mm round ever produced."

I can't decide... is that an oxymoron?

Selfless Warrior

President Obama's hand-picked general to lead the war in Afghanistan barely held ground against the Taliban, and was losing the bureaucratic battle to Obama's even more inept civilian appointees; an incompetent ambassador, a clueless national security advisor, and of course, a defeatist President. Instead of losing Afghanistan due to incompetent Democratic leadership, Gen. Stanley McCrystal fragged his civilian leadership and his career, to open the door for the next general and give him a chance to win where McCrystal was not allowed.

Into this gap steps General David Petraeus, the general who broke Sunni and Shia insurgencies in Iraq and ended the war there are clearly as any insurgency can ever be defeated.

Most will applaud General Petraeus' decision to take command in Afghanistan, as it seems logical to have the architect of one counterinsurgency success take over what appears on the surface to be a similar effort.

But what most will not realize is that General Petraeus demoted himself to lead this war. The general who led Americas' efforts in the entire region is stepping back down to take over one grinding, thankless campaign.

By doing so he risks his legacy. He risks defeat in a land where outsiders have battled and lost for a thousand years. But he knows—better than any of us—that he is the best man to lead this fight. If anyone can win this war, he can.

God be with you General, and those in your command.

CNN: McChrystal Submits Resignation

Not confirmed, but not out of line.

Now, if we can get a replacement that actually allows our soldiers and Marines to shoot the enemy...

Via MediaLizzy on Twitter.

Free Speech Meets Democratic Arson

Robert Stacey McCain seems to think he figured out why people become Democrats.

I'm not convinced that is the whole truth, but it does help explain why some folks get so fired up when called out for their delusional beliefs.

Eighth Tarheel Terror Suspect Captured in Kosovo

Still one to go:

Kosovo police on Thursday arrested an ethnic Albanian man suspected of having supported a planned terrorist attack in North Carolina, they said Thursday.

Bajram Asllani, 29, a native of Mitrovico, Kosovo, was arrested following an extradition request from the United States, police said. He faces charges of providing material support to terrorists and conspiracy to kill, kidnap, maim or injure persons.

An April 19 criminal complaint unsealed Thursday alleges that Asllani conspired with eight men charged last July with plotting a series of terrorist attacks overseas and securing weapons and training in North Carolina.

Seven suspects – Daniel Patrick Boyd, 39, his sons, Dylan Boyd, 22, and Zakariya "Zak" Boyd, 20, and Hysen Sherifi, 24, Mohammad Omar Aly Hassan, 22, Ziyad Yaghi, 21, and Anes Subasic, 33 – are being held in the U.S. An eighth suspect, Jude Kenan Mohammad, 20, is believed to be in Pakistan.

Obama's Love Letter to Terrorism

Dear Gaza,

You elected a terrorist group to lead you. You cheered as they threw screaming rivals from the tops of buildings onto the streets below with a sickening thud, amassed weapons to carry out their chartered goal of the genocide of the Israeli people, and provided exquisite "poor me" theatrics to the media worthy of a Tony award, even as they raked in millions from selling stolen aid shipments on the black market.

For creating all this, when you could have taken the easy way out and chosen peace and prosperity, you deserve an award.

How does $400 million sound?

With all my love,

Barack

Idiot: NJ Jihadist Was "Death to All Juice" Guy

D'oh.

Turkish Terrorist Autopsies Suggest They Were Shot By Their Own Men

First the spin, then the facts:

Nine Turkish men on board the Mavi Marmara were shot a total of 30 times and five were killed by gunshot wounds to the head, according to the vice-chairman of the Turkish council of forensic medicine, which carried out the autopsies for the Turkish ministry of justice today.

The results revealed that a 60-year-old man, Ibrahim Bilgen, was shot four times in the temple, chest, hip and back. A 19-year-old, named as Fulkan Dogan, who also has US citizenship, was shot five times from less that 45cm, in the face, in the back of the head, twice in the leg and once in the back. Two other men were shot four times, and five of the victims were shot either in the back of the head or in the back, said Yalcin Buyuk, vice-chairman of the council of forensic medicine.

The findings emerged as more survivors gave their accounts of the raids. Ismail Patel, the chairman of Leicester-based pro-Palestinian group Friends of al-Aqsa, who returned to Britain today, told how he witnessed some of the fatal shootings and claimed that Israel had operated a "shoot to kill policy".

He calculated that during the bloodiest part of the assault, Israeli commandos shot one person every minute. One man was fatally shot in the back of the head just two feet in front him and another was shot once between the eyes. He added that as well as the fatally wounded, 48 others were suffering from gunshot wounds and six activists remained missing, suggesting the death toll may increase.

The new information about the manner and intensity of the killings undermines Israel's insistence that its soldiers opened fire only in self defence and in response to attacks by the activists.

Nice try, but no cigar.

Let's get some facts straight, shall we?

Less than a dozen Israeli soldiers armed with paintball guns and sidearms fast-roped to the deck of the Mavi Marmara, where they ran into a buzzsaw of Turkish mercenaries wearing ceramic body armor and armed with metal rods, knives, and yes, firearms. That the lynch mob was armed with guns was confirmed by the ships own captain, who saw them throw overboard as Israeli reinforcements arrived.

Each soldier in the initial boarding party was surrounded upon touch-down, and tackled by groups of Turkish zealots. All told, estimates are that between 60-100 thugs pounced upon the handful of soldiers. Three of the soldiers were severely injured before the last soldier on the helo even hit the deck; two had been shot by the terrorists, and a third soldier had had his head smashed open with a metal rod. Three other soldiers had ben knocked unconscious and dragged below decks in hopes of making them hostages.

A maximum of four soldiers fired killing shots into the lynch mob. We know this because the Israeli Staff Sergeant that was the last soldier on deck killed six of the nine with his sidearm, a Glock pistol. Because of their position, all shots were straight on at close range, into the heads and chests of their charging targets.

But that does not match what we see the Turkish corner's forensics tells us, Indeed he adds quite a bit of new and useful information to the story, that the media can't spin its way out of, no matter how hard they try.

The corner speaks of his mercenary countrymen being shot from behind, in the back and back of the head. Since the Israeli soldiers at this time had been forced back into a single small defensive position as the lynch mob continued to advance with weapons in a frontal rush, this strongly suggests that at least half the rounds that hit Ibrahim Bilgen and Fulkan Dogan were fired by their fellow mercenaries behind them.

The other dead bore similar wounds, with shots to the head from the front (fired by the Israelis) and shots to the back from behind, most likely fired by other terrorists.

We know well from previous encounters in Gaza and Lebanon that Israel's enemies think nothing of killing their own in order to blame the Jews for their deaths.

This is simply the first time that an unwitting coroner on their side has given us medical evidence that those killed died at their countrymen's hands.

Who Paid the Turkish Terrorists on the Mavi Marmara?

The Jerusalem Post ran an interview today with one of the Israeli soldiers that attempted to search the blockade runner Mavi Marmara as it attempted to breach the join Israeli-Egyptian blockade of the Gaza strip.

The soldier in question was the senior-most noncom on the mission, and the last soldier to fast-rope down to the ship from the helicopter hovering overhead. By the time he hit the deck, two more senior officers had already been shot by Turkish "peace activists" wearing heavy ceramic body armor, and a third officer was severely injured after having his skull crushed with the heavy rods some of the terrorists were using as weapons.

The soldier has the other commandos form a defensive perimeter around their wounded comrades, and when the terrorists pressed their attack, they opened fire to keep from being overrun. The soldier in question killed six of the nine Turkish terrorists killed in the attempted blockade running with his handgun at point-blank range.

When the ship was finally captured and brought into port, the attackers were found to have large sums of money upon them; apparent payment for the pre-planned assault. According to the captain of the Mavi Marmara, the Turks were armed as well, and fired shots at the Israelis. He apparently watched the terrorists throw their weapons over the side of the ship, and forensic teams located shell casings that did not match Israeli weapons.

Turkish terrorists/mercenaries (chose the terminology you like best, as both would seem to apply) were paid substantial amounts of money by someone to stage an international incident, attacking soldiers simply attempting to enforce a blockade of an enemy port where ships loaded with hundreds of tons Iranian weapons had previously attempted to dock.

The question I have is whether or not turkey's increasingly Islamic government had a hand in staging this incident, and if they did, whether they are the kind of "ally" the United States or NATO really needs.

Turk Born in America Was One of the Aggressors In Blockade Runner Assault; More Ships Coming

Furkan Dogan was born to Turkish parents and left our country at the age of two, apparently never to return. While technically holding citizenship, he is a birthright American only, an accident of geography and in no obvious way attached our nation's culture. To call him an American is something of a joke.

Dogan was one of the nine Muslim terrorist sympathizers killed as they tried to lynch Israeli soldiers carrying out an inspection of their ship, a ship attempting to run a blockade of Gaza. News accounts claim that Dogan was shot in the head four times and once in the chest. The shot placement and other known conditions of the raid suggests Dogan was attacking Israeli soldiers at point-blank range when he was killed.

Israel and Egypt have maintained a joint sea blockade of Gaza because of legitimate concerns that Iran is attempting to provide the terrorist group Hamas with long-range rockets to destabilize the region and target Israeli civilian population centers. Late last year the MV Francop was intercepted carrying small arms ammunition, rockets, grenades and artillery shells from Iran to Gaza.

The MV Rachel Corrie, a decrepit one-time beer hauler, is part of the next group of ships attempting to run the blockade. Named after a leftist radical and pro-terrorist sympathizer killed by a bulldozer attempting to protect Hamas weapons-smuggling tunnels, the Corrie is thought to be carrying cement, one of the materials that Israel and Egypt do not allow to be imported into Gaza because of concerns that Hamas will use the building material to construct hardened bunkers.

Other materials being carried by the vessel are already in abundance in Gaza, supplied over far more practical land routes.

The Irish-flagged Corrie, like its namesake, isn't providing anything of value to the people of Gaza, and merely provides a small degree of political cover to a genocidal terrorist group.

Update: The Corrie turns around... for now.

Shock: Muslim Claims Israel Faked Weapons Recovered During Blockade Runner Raid

TIP: If you are going to accuse a government of faking photos of weapons and military material captured during a legal search of the vessel carrying the contraband, you should probably make sure they don't also have video of the ship and the weapons as well.

Politically-correct ROE Seeks to Turn Afghanistan into Beirut

God forbid we send out soldiers into battle with loaded weapons:

Commanders have reportedly ordered a U.S. military unit in Afghanistan to patrol in a manner that could handicap them.

Some soldiers are being ordered to conduct patrols without a round chambered in their weapons, The US Report has learned from an anonymous source at a forward operating base in Afghanistan. Our source was unsure if the order came from his unit or if it affected other units.

On war correspondent Michael Yon's Facebook page, commenters stated that this is a common practice in Iraq, while others said that it is occurring in Afghanistan as well. According to military protocol, "Amber" status requires weapons to have a loaded magazine, but the safety on and no round chambered.

"The idea that any combat unit would conduct any operation, including patrolling and even manning a security post -- in which direct action may-or-may not take place -- and not having weapons loaded, borders on being criminally negligent in my opinion," says Lt. Col. W. Thomas Smith Jr., a recognized expert on terrorism and military/national defense issues. "This is nothing more than infusing politically correct restrictions into already overly restrictive rules of engagement. And this PC nonsense is going to get people killed."

I wonder how high up this order originated, and with good reason. The order to put the Marines in Beirut on "amber" status is rumored to have come when then Senator Joe Biden became infuriated when he visited the base and found that the guards were armed with locked and loaded weapons.

This email came to me from a Marine roughly two years ago:

I am a former Marine, having served from '78-'86 When the barracks in Beirut went down, three Marines I knew went with it. Two were Marines I had attended a school with, and were acquaintances at best. The third was a Marine captain that had, immediately before his mission in Beirut, been my company executive officer.

Many years later, I met another former Marine who had been a senior NCO there. We began to exchange stories of our time in the Corps, as former Marines are prone to do. When the subject of the Middle East arose, he told me a disturbing tale. In a nutshell, Biden, a few weeks before the bombing, had visited the barracks. He had a fit at the defensive posture of the unit, which had prudently set up barricades, automatic weapons emplacements, etc. Per Biden, they were not deployed as appropriate to their "peacekeeping" mission - too warlike, and "sending the wrong message."

He demanded that the fortifications be dismantled. The senior NCO on the scene respectfully reminded the senator that he was not in the chain of command. After throwing a tantrum, Biden and the rest of the congressional fact-finding mission left for home. A few days later, word came down from the Pentagon to comply with Biden's instruction. Evidently, Biden had located a spineless officer at the Pentagon. Also included in the order were some changes to the ROE (Rules of Engagement) that slowed response to any attacks. (Marines were not allowed to keep their weapons loaded) The one Marine, a young lance corporal, who was able to fire on the truck as it headed toward the barracks was only able to do so because he had kept his weapon loaded in spite of the order, after the unit first sergeant had hinted he would turn a blind eye. This is the same young Marine, that suffering from survivor guilt, took his own life shortly after.

I was unable to confirm this story at the time, just as I am unable to confirm it now. We do know, however, that our troops in Afghanistan are faced with absurd rules of engagement created by REMFs (I'll let you look that up on your own), bureaucrats, and politicians like those presently in power.

It appears they won't be satisfied until they get our soldiers and Marines massacred... again.

Religion of Peace Attacks Cartoonist... Again

Let them have their way in all things, or face their violent wrath:

The home of a Swedish artist who once drew a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad as a dog has been hit by a suspected arson attack, police said Saturday.

Lars Vilks, who lives in Nyhamnslage in southern Sweden, was not at home during the attack late Friday night and no one was reported injured.

It was the latest in a week of attacks on the 53-year-old cartoonist, who was assaulted Tuesday by a man while he lectured at a university and saw his Web site apparently attacked by hacker on Wednesday.

I've long tried to give Muslims the benefit of the doubt, hoping that despite 1,300+ years of evidence to the contrary that it was extremists that misunderstood or perverted Islam that were the root of Islamic terrorism and suppression.

But that simply isn't the case, it it?

Bomber Admits Terror Motive

Shahzad, who rather infamously hates George W. Bush, was inspired to bomb Times Square by the drone attacks he saw carried out against the Taliban in Pakistan on the orders of the Obama Administration:

It was payback.

The Connecticut man charged yesterday with the botched Times Square car bombing confessed to trying to slaughter innocent people in retaliation for US drone attacks that wiped out the leadership of his beloved Taliban, The Post has learned.

Admitted terrorist Faisal Shahzad -- who copped to training in explosives in the past year with Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, the leading extremist Islamic group in his native Pakistan -- said he was driven to evil by the slew of deaths among leaders of the terror group, law-enforcement sources revealed yesterday.

His training came in a tribal area where American drone aircraft have pummeled members of the Pakistan Taliban and al Qaeda in the past year.

The article goes on to mention that the current Administration is downplaying Shahzad's motive, no doubt hoping to stem of the chorus of "I told you so!" yips from his anti-war left flank. Obama has not only validated the Bush Administration's use of drone warfare in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but escalated it significantly with brutal effect.

Comfortably Dumb

David Neiwert at Crooks and Liars makes an asinine and snarky post this morning about the capture of Times Square bombing suspect Faisal Shahzad, writing:

The next time you hear some right-winger (most notably Dick Cheney) sneer at the Obama administration's "law enforcement approach to terrorism," remember this.

Neiwert is either dumb as a post, or worse, assumes his readers are.

The law enforcement approach to terrorism that conservatives disagree with concerns terrorist events and suspects outside of U.S. territory.

Many liberal Democrats prefer to treat international terrorism as an international law enforcement matter, a laughable strategy considering the ideological (and occasional state) support many terrorists receive in the countries they use as their base of operations. The military approach—which, I hasten to add, has been largely adopted by the Obama Administration because it works—involves surveillance and military interdiction instead of arrest warrants. The Predator drones strikes inside Pakistan that have stepped up under Obama, and occasional raids in the Horn of Africa, are perfect examples of this in practice.

I defy Neiwert to product anyone—former Vice President Dick Cheney included—who calls for military strikes on American soil against suspected terrorists. No, we trust our federal, state and local law enforcement officers to use their expertise to track down terrorists on American soil, and they did just that in this instance, and admirably well.

Niewert is abusing a strawman. Worse, he's insulting the intelligence of his readers.

Or at least I hope he is.

Arrest Made in Times Square Terror Attack

The usual suspects:

Federal authorities arrested a U.S. citizen of Pakistani descent Monday night at New York's JFK International Airport in connection with Saturday's attempted Times Square car bombing.

The man was identified as Faisal Shahzad, of Connecticut, Attorney General Eric Holder said. Shahzad was attempting to board a flight to Dubai at the time of his arrest, Holder said.

A total of three people were taken off the flight, but information is scarce about the other two.

And the Taliban video claim? It was posted from Connecticut as well. As it starred known Taliban, that video claim that this was a Taliban attack seems even more solid than earilier.

Taliban Claims Responsibility for Times Square Bomb Attempt

Let's see Mayor Bloomberg continue to downplay this:

A top Pakistani Taliban commander took credit for yesterday's failed car bomb attack in New York City.

Qari Hussain Mehsud, the top bomb maker for the Movement of the Taliban in Pakistan, said he takes "fully responsibility for the recent attack in the USA." Qari Hussain made the claim on an audiotape accompanied by images that was released on a YouTube website that calls itself the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan News Channel.

The tape has yet to be verified, but US intelligence officials contacted by The Long War Journal believe it is legitimate. The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan News Channel on YouTube was created on April 30. Officials believe it was created to announce the Times Square attack, and Qari Hussain's statement was pre-recorded.

"This attack is a revenge for the great & valuable martyred leaders of mujahideen," Qari Hussain said. He listed Baitullah Mehsud, the former leader of the Pakistani Taliban who was killed in a Predator strike in August 2009, and Abu Omar al Baghdadi, the former leader of al Qaeda Islamic State of Iraq who was killed by Iraqi forces in mid-April. And although he was not mentioned, an image of Abu Ayyub al Masri, the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, was also displayed in the images accompanying the audiotape.

You can view the video yourself at The Long War Journal. I don't think we can emphasis enough that this has every appearance of being a legitimate Taliban attack inside the United States, plotted overseas, and not the work of an isolated homegrown jihadi acting on his own initiative.

The bomber obviously has access to the explosives and vehicles as they are extremely common components. The question now is whether the bomber has orders to make a second attempt.

(h/t AllahPundit on Twitter)

Possible Fuel-Air Explosive Terrorist Attack In Times Square Goes Awry

I'm just getting up to speed on the news of a failed terrorist attack in New York City' Times Square, where authorities responded to the scene of a smoking vehicle after calls about an explosion, and found the bomb:

Police officers from the emergency service unit and firefighters flooded the area and were troubled by the hazard lights and running engine, and by the fact that the S.U.V. was oddly angled in the street. At this point, a firefighter from Ladder 4 reported hearing several "pops" from within the vehicle. The police also learned that the Pathfinder had the wrong license plates on it.

Members of the Police Department’s bomb squad donned protective gear, broke the Pathfinder's back windows and sent in a "robotic device" to "observe" it, said Deputy Commissioner Paul J. Browne, the police department's chief spokesman.

Inside, they discovered three canisters of propane like those used for barbecue grills, two five-gallon cans of gasoline, consumer-grade fireworks — the apparent source of the "pops" — and two clocks with batteries, the mayor said. He said the device "looked amateurish."

Mr. Browne said: "It appeared it was in the process of detonating, but it malfunctioned."

I'm going to disagree with the Deputy Commissioner, and suggest there is nothing amatuerish about this bomb. I agree with Allahpundit that appears the 3 bulk propane tanks and 10 gallons of gas were to be the explosives in a fuel-air explosive, one of the deadliest weapons in modern warfare. While not as polished as those used by mlitary forces (including our own), the explosive power of these devices in IED form are fierce, as a burster charge spreads a flammable cloud of fuel, that is then detonated by a secondary charge to form a massive overpressure wave that is extremely lethal.

This particular device seems to have failed because the bomb builder simply got his chemistry slightly askew, and had the fuel air mix inside the vehicle too low (which I somewhat doubt), or more likely, had too much fuel in the cabin of the vehicle so that the potential bomb didn't have the air it needed to breath and detonate properly. If the fireworks had ignited when the fuel-air mixture was optimum, we'd be reading a story of carnage this morning like those we've seen in Iraq, with hundreds dead.

They need to find the individual terrorist or terrorist group behind this and fast, because odds are that they now know exactly what they did wrong with this bomb, and they are not likley to make the same mistake again.

Update: South Park related? The evidence is thin, but it isn't entirely unreasonable.

Top AQI Terrorists Killed

It has taken several years of hard work, but the top two leaders of al Qaeda in Iraq have been confirmed killed in a joint U.S./Iraqi operation:

Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki announced Monday that two top insurgent leaders had been killed, including a somewhat mythic figure who has operated under the name Abu Omar al-Baghdadi. Mr. Baghdadi has been reported dead or detained several times previously, and his very existence had been called into question a few years ago by American military leaders.

After Mr. Maliki’s press conference, the American military released a statement verifying that Mr. Baghdadi was killed in a joint raid between Iraqi and United States forces in the dark hours of Sunday morning near Tikrit, near Saddam Hussein’s hometown.

Also killed, according to Mr. Maliki and American officials, was Abu Ayyub al-Masri, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, also known as Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, a largely Iraqi group that includes some foreign leadership.

The simple fact of the matter is that al-Baghdadi was a fictional character when he began, and was a voice played by an actor. Later a former officer-turned-terrorist picked up the moniker, and it is this second al-Baghdadi that was killed.

al-Masri's death was the most important of the two, but it was nice that both were terminated together, which should serve to fragment the group further.

Tangos Down: WikiLeaks Misrepresents Apache Assault on Medhi Army Militia

WikiLeaks has posted video of what they decided to frame as "collateral murder."

Anyone with a passing knowledge of the strict rules of engagment our soldiers and aviators follow, and who took the time to pay attention to the audio and video, cannot be swayed by the deceptive rhetoric offered up by WikiLeaks. While the video below confirms the deaths of two Reuters employees and the wounding of two children, it also confirms the presence of weapons within the first few seconds of the video playing.

Two Reuters employees made the mistake of joining a ragtag group of Muqtada al Sadr's Medhi Army militia, some of which were still clearly armed, with at least one folding stock AK-pattern assault rifle (3:41, top left) and an RPG-7 (3:44, second from top left) antitank rocket carried by men at the rear of the group (the Reuters employees were near the front) in the video that WikiLeaks chose to show us.

As for the father who made the tragic mistake of trying to intercede in a hot combat zone with dust still rising and blood flowing... I admire his courage, but question his intelligence. He put his children in harm's way, and broke laws of war that civilians in their fifth year of war should have known by rote.

People die in war, and those who die aren't always combatants. It sucks.

But it isn't a crime.

We would all be better off if some of those who decided to opine about things they don't understand would withold their ignorant commentary so that those who do understand can cut through the deception offered by WikiLeaks' editorializing.

Update: Dan Froomkin, fired from the Washington Post for too-liberal bias, captures the idiocy we're seeing from terrorist defenders in just two short paragraphs:

Two crewmen share a laugh when a Bradley fighting vehicle runs over one of the corpses...

[snip]

...The helicopter crew, which was patrolling an area that had been the scene of fierce fighting that morning, said they spotted weapons on members of the first group -- although the video shows one gun, at most. The crew also mistook a telephoto lens for a rocket-propelled grenade.

The vehicle than ran over what appears to be human remains in a vacant lot filled with trash and rubble was decidedly not a 27-ton Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV), a tracked personnel carrier similar to a tank, but was instead a much smaller 4-wheeled Humvee, as is obvious in the video.

Froomkin, who can't tell a tank from a truck, wants us to believe he has the discernment to tell a telephoto lens from a grenade launcher carried by a different individual at the rear of the group in the opening of the video (3:44, top of frame, second man from left).

Update: Got a call from BBC Radio, and may be on World Have Your Say between 1:00-2:00PM ET to discuss this story.

Joe Stack's Daughter Calls Him a "Hero"

In case you've already forgotten the name, Joe Stack was the man who set his house on fire last week, and then suicide-crashed his small plane into a building containing IRS offices in Austin, TX, killing Stack and Vernon Hunter, an IRS employee.

Samantha Bell, Stack's daughter, considers him a hero. Sorta:

The daughter of a man who crashed his small plane into an Internal Revenue Service building called her father a hero for his anti-government views but said his actions, which killed a tax service employee, were "inappropriate."

Joe Stack's adult daughter, Samantha Bell, spoke to ABC's "Good Morning America" from her home in Norway. Asked during a phone interview broadcast Monday if she considered her father a hero, she said: "Yes. Because now maybe people will listen."

It sounds like someone is living in what we here at CY like to call a "community-based reality." I think it is normal for most well-adjusted people to hold a somewhat idolized view of their parents, even as they know that they are far from perfect. But when one of your parents spends the better part of his life making the same bad decision over and over again, and then decides that his bull-headedness is justification to try to murder a building full of people, it's time to shake off that idealized view, and realize that you know, Dad was a real prick.

Dennis the Peasant, an accountant by trade, didn't know Stack in person, but certainly has had his fill of the type. I have no reason to doubt Dennis' insights. Stack was a crank and tax cheat, who blamed others for his failures.

The tax code is a mess, and is in drastic need of reform. I think everyone outside of the Beltway can agree on that. But problems with the tax code—and multiple attempts to defraud it—aren't grounds for mass homicide.

And Joe Stack is anything but a hero.

Finally, Some Common Sense Out of Holder's Justice Department

While it is sure to cause many a lefty to wet themselves, John Yoo and Jay Bybee have been cleared of any wrong-doing in their post 9/11 work providing legal advice on enhanced interrogation techniques. It's refreshing to see that even a Justice Department as corrupt and biased as this one hasn't been able to criminalize honestly argued opinion, even though they certainly tried.

Jennifer Rubin, who has followed this fare more closely that I, dissects the decision, and makes the case that if Holder really wants to prosecute those in Justice who have done wrong, he should start by investigating his own people.

Obama Appoints Nine Terrorist Lawyers to Justice

You've got to be kidding me.

If Byron York is correct, the CIA needs to start flying Reapers over Eric Holder's terrorist advocate-filled Justice Department:

Attorney General Eric Holder says nine Obama appointees in the Justice Department have represented or advocated for terrorist detainees before joining the Justice Department. But he does not reveal any names beyond the two officials whose work has already been publicly reported. And all the lawyers, according to Holder, are eligible to work on general detainee matters, even if there are specific parts of some cases they cannot be involved in.

At least nine Obama-appointed terrorist lawyers work in the very department that is supposed to be trying to put them away behind bars. This strikes me as a conflict of interest whether or not these appointees recuse themselves from cases involving their (hopefully former) clients.

Honestly, what the hell is wrong with these people?

There Are No Coincidences

A U.S. solider deployed in Afghanistan captured the mastermind of the attack that killed his cousin three years before. When TankerBabe says she got chills hearing this story, I can understand why.

Via Thunder Run.

Xe Contractors Killed In CIA Attack

Via WRAL:

Two CIA contractors killed in a bombing in Afghanistan Wednesday were employed by North Carolina-based Xe, formerly known as Blackwater, according to CNN.

A former intelligence officer told CNN that two of seven deceased worked for the private security and training firm based in Moyock, a small community in Currituck County.

The Taliban has claimed responsibility for the bombing at a former military base on the edge of Khost city, the capital of Khost province, which borders Pakistan and is a Taliban stronghold. Six other CIA workers were wounded.

It would be interesting to know what services the Xe contractors were performing. Theoretically, security for government employees would have been their primary role. Just as obviously, that security was breached.

Obama The Appeaser May Have Violated Executive Order Against Negotiating With Terrorists

I completely missed this story yesterday, where Bill Roggio noted that the Obama Administration fell into a trap laid by Iranian-backed extremists, and released terrorists that killed American soldiers:

The US has released the leader of an Iranian-backed Shia terror group behind the kidnapping and murder of five US soldiers in Karbala in January 2007.

Qais Qazali, the leader of the Asaib al Haq or the League of the Righteous, was set free by the US military and transferred to Iraqi custody in exchange for the release of British hostage Peter Moore, US military officers and intelligence officials told The Long War Journal. The US military directly implicated Qais in the kidnapping and murder of five US soldiers in Karbala in January 2007.

"We let a very dangerous man go, a man whose hands are stained with US and Iraqi blood," a military officer said. "We are going to pay for this in the future."

The US military has maintained that the release of members and leaders of the League of the Righteous is related to a reconciliation agreement between the terror group and the Iraqi government, but some US military officers disagree.

"The official line is the release of Qazali is about reconciliation, but in reality this was a prisoner swap," a military intelligence official said.

The Brit released in this uneven exchange was purposefully kidnapped to be used as swap-bait, and our American Chamberlain showed he was precisely the cultured rube they expected.

Today, Roggio follows up by noting that Obama may have violated an executive order issued by Ronald Reagan that expressly forbid negotiating with terrorists.

To the best I can determine, there are two possible answers to the question of whether or not Obama violated National Security Decision Directive Number 207.

The first possible answer is that yes, the Administration did violate the Directive. If that is the case, I'm not sure what the ramifications could or should be. I suspect that even if criminal laws were broken by the White House, the Holder Justice Department would not seek to prosecute. In the unlikely event that they would prosecute, you can be assured that a lower-level staffer would be the fall guy.

The other possible answer—and perhaps the more likely one—is that shortly after taking office President Obama issued an executive order of his own that authorizes negotiations with terrorists.

Whether he broke the Reagan-era directive or cravenly issued a secret one of his own, the fact of the matter is that our nation's enemies know that taking hostages is now a viable option to win concessions with this President.

Hell of a job, Barry.

Hell of a job.

Houston Wets Itself Over Glorified Pipe

Read this story and you'd think that Houston Police ran across a terrorist with heavy-duty, anti-tank weaponry.

It isn't until you get to almost the end of the article that they finally reveal that the "rocket launcher" is nothing more or less than a fiberglass tube.

Prosecutors said there are no state charges for having the unarmed launcher or possessing Jihadist writings, unless they contain some type of threat.

The former director of Houston's FBI office said rocket launchers can be dangerous if they're in the wrong hands.

"I don't know any other use for those weapons except in combat," Don Clark said. "I've had them in combat, used them in combat. That's what they are used for."

The weapon is the warhead and rocket; the tube is a single-use disposable item.

So one of two things happened here. This jihadi wannabe acquired a used (and therefore useless) AT-4 tube (probably via an online aution like this one), or he bought the Airsoft version.

I'm quite sure it can be terrifying. It just simply isn't a weapon, no matter how much drama the media attempted to stir up here to justify the amont of time they spent on this story.

Terrorist Not Only One With Pants On Fire

I'e been offline spending time with family over the past few days and so I'm behind the curve on the story of the terrorist that tried to detonate a bomb on a flight about to land in Detroit. The attempted detonation of a PETN device with a nitroglycerine detonator failed. Instead of bringing down the airliner, the explosive misfired and burned instead of exploding. A Dutch passenger is credited with being a hero for his actions in the immediate wake of the failed attack for subduing the would-be terrorist, but the simple fact of the matter is that if the device had functioned properly, the plane would have likely gone down, killing hundreds. Quite simply, God and bad chemistry was on our side.

It was therefore quite revolting to see DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano claim that "the system worked." The system was an utter and unmitigated failure.

The system allowed one of the most dangerous explosives known to man—one known to be a favorite of al Qaeda—aboard a flight into the United States in sufficient quantity to destroy a plane in midair. The device used one of the oldest known and most common explosives in the world as a trigger as well. As for the bomber himself, he was a known al Qaeda affiiliate who had been turned in by his own father for his extremism.

In what way, Janet Napolitano, did Homeland Security "work" when it let a known terrorist fly into the United States with a bomb strapped to his body?

The simple fact of the matter is that our security measures failed once again, and the DHS secretary is trying to cover for a group that repeatedly fail in their primary mission, while wasting time and energy and focus in attempts to demonize her political opponents.

The DHS failed, and failed miserably. Perhaps if they spent more time attempting to hunt down terrorists, and less time trying to smear Americans that don't like Barack Obama, terrorists like Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab wouldn't be able to make it onto US-bound flights in the first place.

Jonah Goldberg wants Napolitano fired, but I'm not sure what purpose that would serve. Looking at this Administration's raft of failed and marginally competent appointees, do you really expect that any replacement nominee would be any less ideologically-drive or more effective?

Camouflage FAIL

The British are breaking out a new camouflage pattern for the first time in 40 years, as their standard issue DPM (Disrupted Pattern Material) isn't faring well in the varied terrain of Afghanistan, where soldiers have to shift from sun-washed arid desert backdrops to the deeper and darker colors of lush green river valleys within the same mission. Instead of helping hide British troops, their current uniforms were making them stand out. The new uniforms, however, won't hide the poor material support British soldiers are otherwise receiving.

The new pattern is based upon Crye Multicam, a pattern originally developed for the U.S Army that was shelved in favor of the digital Universal Camouflage Pattern (UCP) currently being worn by the Army... which is the same pattern that is failing American soldiers in Afghanistan.

Now the U.S Army is taking a second look at Multicam, along with different and darker version of the current UCP.

My advice?

Better start stocking up on the discount flecktarn camo from your local Army/Navy store, before Uncle Sam recognizes the deal and buys it all up.

Beyond Doubt: Iran Working on Nuke Trigger

There is no more point in denial:

Confidential intelligence documents obtained by The Times show that Iran is working on testing a key final component of a nuclear bomb.

The notes, from Iran’s most sensitive military nuclear project, describe a four-year plan to test a neutron initiator, the component of a nuclear bomb that triggers an explosion. Foreign intelligence agencies date them to early 2007, four years after Iran was thought to have suspended its weapons programme...

[snip]

"Although Iran might claim that this work is for civil purposes, there is no civil application," said David Albright, a physicist and president of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, which has analysed hundreds of pages of documents related to the Iranian programme. "This is a very strong indicator of weapons work."

And there is little doubt that when Iran has what they consider "enough" nuclear weapons, they will not be used to deter war, but to trigger Armageddon.

It seems our dithering President has a very simple choice.

He can be remembered as the American President who did nothing, the President that let Iran build nuclear weapons and trigger a nuclear exchange with Israel that killed tens of millions, including hundreds of thousands of American servicemen and civilians in the region. Barack Obama—the man who did nothing and watched the world burn.

Or Obama can be vilified by his left fringe as a warmonger, and try to use military force to deny Iran the last few critical components that separates them from becoming the world's more dangerous nuclear-armed regime.

I don't envy his decision, but given the choices, it still seems to be rather easy one.

Update: Sky News claims it has confirmed the authenticity of the evidence:

Sky News foreign affairs editor Tim Marshall said: "Sources confirm that the document is genuine. However, the Government and the US will be reluctant to wave it about just yet.

"There's three weeks to go until President Obama's end-of-the-year deadline for his policy of engagement with Iran.

"The big push for sanctions will not begin until January. No-one wants to pre-empt that."

Dither, dither, dither...

Horrors! NT Times Slams CIA/Blackwater for... Poor Project Managment Skills

The New York Times is still deeply involved in fighting the ghosts of President's past, trumpeting the headline, Blackwater Guards Tied to Secret Raids by the C.I.A.

Considering the hype, I was expecting something explosive—maybe they helped snatch potential terrorists off the streets of Cairo, or maybe even here in the U.S.—or at least something mildly titillating.

Instead, the Times delivers this:

Private security guards from Blackwater Worldwide participated in some of the C.I.A.’s most sensitive activities — clandestine raids with agency officers against people suspected of being insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan and the transporting of detainees, according to former company employees and intelligence officials.

Really? This is the big story? While the confirmation that Blackwater operatives might have participated in raids in combat zones is newsworthy, it isn't exactly surprising, is it? That they've also escorted detainees being transported from one location to another is frankly boring.

But maybe there's more too this story than the lede suggests.

The raids against suspects occurred on an almost nightly basis during the height of the Iraqi insurgency from 2004 to 2006, with Blackwater personnel playing central roles in what company insiders called "snatch and grab" operations, the former employees and current and former intelligence officers said.

Now, that is a bit more interesting. They were engaging almost nightly, and played central roles. The C.I.A. partnering with mercs... sounds like a thousand B-rated action movies, but hey, I like those.

Let's see what else they've got.

Several former Blackwater guards said that their involvement in the operations became so routine that the lines supposedly dividing the Central Intelligence Agency, the military and Blackwater became blurred. Instead of simply providing security for C.I.A. officers, they say, Blackwater personnel at times became partners in missions to capture or kill militants in Iraq and Afghanistan, a practice that raises questions about the use of guns for hire on the battlefield.

Okay, NYT. You had me, and then you lost me.

If I understand this right, the Blackwater guys weren't originally a planned part of the raids, but were there playing security for the C.I.A. guys much as they did the State Department. At some point, there was the need for an extra active participant or more in the raid, and the Blackwater guys, being former military and there were the obvious and logical choice to step in.

I can see a logical (and quite human) progression from being an impressed team member who stepped in as part of his overarching mission to protect his principle (which seems to arguably still be within the scope of his assignment), to the more murky and politically problematic normalized use of Blackwater guards in these missions. There is certainly what the project managers among us with recognize as "scope creep," but the Times still isn't giving us much meat. Were the guards involved in overwatch roles, setting up a perimeter? Or were they intimately active in the actual door-kicking, room-clearing, Tango-bagging searches themselves? If so, to what extent? Did they shoot anyone the shouldn't have? Did they shoot anyone, at all?

The Times doesn't tell us. That seems to be a very important distinction to make if the newspaper is going to level charges of wrong-doing. Lacking that, the story seems to fall flat.

Indeed, a close reading of the story leaves the reader more perplexed than informed. The Times writers certainly set a dark and ominous tone, but what they delivered was anti-climatic.

Other than vague insinuations of wrong-doing and the rehashing of historical events involving the company—stories the paper has already covered ad nauseum—there seems to be very little actual substance in what the authors present .

Scope creep? Really? That is the big story?

If I didn't know better about the Times stellar reputation for politics-free, objective reporting, I might be tempted to offer up an allegation of my own. If I were so inclined, I might suggest they were offering up a red herring to their readers... perhaps to distract them from the sort of things the editors might not want their readers thinking about.

Nuke-Crazed Dwarf Claims America is More Powerful Than Islamic Jesus

At least that is what Ahmadinejad is claiming between his "treatments" at Tehran's Madhi Ali Small Engine Repair and Psychiatric Institute to Dubai-based Al Arabiya.

Ahmadinejad reportedly claims he has documented evidence that the U.S. is blocking the return of Mahdi, the Imam believed by Muslims to be the savior.

"We have documented proof that they believe that a descendant of the prophet of Islam will raise in these parts and he will dry the roots of all injustice in the world," Ahmadinejad said during a speech on Monday, according to Al Arabiya.

"They have devised all these plans to prevent the coming of the Hidden Imam because they know that the Iranian nation is the one that will prepare the grounds for his coming and will be the supporters of his rule," Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying.

Ahmadinejad continued the rant by claiming there have been plots by both the West as well as countries in the East to wipe out his country, according to Iranian news Web site Tabak.

"They have planned to annihilate Iran. This is why all policymakers and analysts believe Iran is the true winner in the Middle East," Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying by the site. He also alleged that foreign nations seek to control Iran's oil and natural resources.

For those of you not familiar with Ahmadinejad's religion, he belongs to a radical Shia sub-cult that even camel-sex-approving Ayatollah Khomeini thought was nuts. The mad dwarf's belief is that his messiah will only return after the world is burned in a cleansing fire, and somehow America is blocking their trip to Paradise. If it sounds to you like someone is laying the groundwork for a mass suicide to put Jonestown to shame, then you are on the right track.

When you understand their belief system is premised on triggering a nuclear war that obliterates their country in order to jump-start their End of Days and trip to Paradise, then you understand why Iran's fanatical leaders are so driven to obtain nuclear weapons.

It also showcases why our ignorant President is running us full-speed towards a nuclear war with his failure to even attempt disarming them preemptively with all necessary measures. Cowardice always leads to greater casualties than standing up for what is right.

Russian Train Destroyed by Terrorist Bomb

The express train carrying passengers from Moscow to St. Petersburg was derailed Friday, killing 30 and injuring at least one hundred. Russian authorities claim that have found a blast crater and chemical residue that indicates the train was targeted in an act of terrorism, using homemade explosives equivalent to 15 pounds of TNT.

If homemade explosives were used I would be surprised to find out if it was anything other than triacetone triperoxide (TATP), an old standby for terrorists that was perhaps most infamously used in the London subway bombings.

No one has publicly taken responsibility for the blast, and a motive remains unclear at this time.

So Much for Brotherly Love

A second set of potential terrorists was charged with attempting to buy arms in Philadelphia in as many days.

Three Lebanese nationals and one American resident were charged today with attempting to obtain 1,200 M-4 military assault weapons for Hezbollah, the second set of such charges in as many days generated in Philadelphia.

U.S. Attorney Michael L. Levy declined to say if the government informer who penetrated the alleged smuggling ring was the same person cited in yesterday's allegations that a man connected to Hezbollah tried to obtain Stinger anti-aircraft missiles for Hezbollah, as well as M4s.

But the individuals charged are not the same.

"We are dealing with two different groups trying to buy M4s," he said.

Idiots. They should have simply asked for a stimulus grant.

Broken Minds

This observation from Tom Maguire has haunted me since last night.

As he told us last Friday, Eric Holder wants to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed in civilian courts because he (mostly) attacked civilians, while the attackers of the USS Cole will be sent to a military tribunal. The Dallas Morning News explained:

There is no contradiction here: military courts for attacks on the military, civilian courts for attacks on civilians.

OMG. And if the next batch of terrorists are clever enough to attack an elementary school will they be tried in juvenile court?

How bizarre is Holder's logic? First, why give more rights and more protections to a terrorists who targets civilians? Secondly, the court ought to be determined by the nature of the defendant, not the nature of the victims - if KSM is an enemy combatant he deserves a military tribunal regardless of who he was crafty enough to target.

I've long disagreed with the underlying ideology of the Obama Administration, which is based upon the philosophies of those men who replaced his father in his life. Radical left-wing ideologies like those the President learned from his mentors—Frank Marshall Davis (communist), Bill Ayers (Marxist), Jeremiah Wright (racist black liberation theology, Marxism), etc—have never led to anything other than misery for the wretches that survive it.

But Obama and his subordinates compound the errors of these diseased ideologies by adopting another failed ideology, one that acts as if the open warfare of Islamic fascism is a civilian law enforcement problem. That flawed thinking already led to horrors of 9/11. Why are our President and Attorney General so dimwitted that they desire to repeat those mistakes and put the lives of Americans at greater risk?

The Convictions of a Coward: Obama Fails to Choose and Chooses to Fail on Afghanistan

Barack Obama knows nothing of military strategy or tactics, doesn't understand counterinsurgency, and holds a barely-disguised contempt for the military. I guess it shouldn't be surprising, then, that the President has rejected all options for winning the war in Afghanistan presented to him:

After months of deliberating, President Obama opted not to accept any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, pushing instead for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

That stance comes in the midst of forceful reservations about a possible troop buildup from the U.S. ambassador in Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, according to a second top administration official.

In strongly worded classified cables to Washington, Eikenberry said he had misgivings about sending in new troops while there are still so many questions about the leadership of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

The Obama Administration sat silently by and enabled what most believe to be a fraudulent reelection of Karzai, and now wants to use his reelection as an excuse? That's like watching an arsonist douse a house in gasoline, only to complain later about the smoldering rubble being a blight on the neighborhood.

Karzai is a starwman, and a pathetic one at that. On two separate occasions in recent we've noted a remarkable counterinsurgency strategy for Afghanistan that bypasses Karzai's corrupt central government altogether, and works with the real arbiters of power in Afghani society, the tribes. One Tribe at a Time (PDF) is a blueprint for winning the Afghan war, and with a smaller footprint to boot.

The Administration could easily adopt this plan, but refuses to consider it an an option. Considering it removes their self-inflicted strawman of an ineffectual and corrupt central government that largely doesn't exist outside of Kabul.

Jim Hanson, retired SF operator and Director of the Warrior Legacy Institute, notes:

He has already had the advice of his entire military chain of command with a near unanimous call for for reinforcements to move to the strategy that won in Iraq. We have watched as he has heard from the deep wisdom of Joe Biden and Rahm Emanuel. We have seen him dither and quibble and show a completely ineffectual and uncommitted face to our enemies and the rest of the world. Now months after his hand-picked commander has told him the situation is bad and getting worse, our troops in the field fight and die without the support of their Commander in Chief. He sent 21,000 more brave men and women there and now they are flappin' in the breeze. How can a squad leader look his men in the eyes and tell them to saddle up and head out on a patrol, perhaps to be the last to die for a cause their President no longer believes in?

Quite clearly, Barack Obama has decided against winning the war in Afghanistan, showing his long history of claiming that the Afghan war is the right war, and the war we must win, to be a bald-faced lie he repeated to get into office.

He is steeling himself for surrender, hunting for excuses to fail. And the rubes that believed he was anything other than a self-loathing defeatist have nobody but themselves to blame for electing him.

Fort Hood Shooter ID'd

With the release of two other possible suspects, it is now starting to look like the shooting at Fort Hood today was the work of a single man, armed with two handguns. He was named as Major Nidal Malik Hasan, an Army psychiatrist who ironically specialized in treating traumatic stress, and who was angry about having to deploy to Iraq at the end of November.

Like another mass murder who targeted young adults, Hasan went to Virginia Tech.

Figures.

Update: Breaking news as of 10:00 PM is that Hasan did not die, and is in custody in stable condition.

Terrorist Attack on Fort Hood

There is breaking news of what sounds like a terrorist attack on Fort Hood.

Early reports are citing 7 dead, 12 wounded, and one shooter taken into custody and another still possibly on base. Some accounts claim there is a third suspect.

While there is no word yet on who is responsible, this sounds very similar to various plots by homegrown Islamic terrorist cells, such as the Willow Springs cell arrested in North Carolina in July.

One gunman may have been killed

Updates as they come in:

Number of wounded revised to 15, and perhaps as many as 20.

Fort Worth Star-Telegram says suspects were armed with M-16s. that could just as easily mean civilian AR-15s, as well.

The shooters are possibly soldiers?

Two suspects captured, four SWAT team members wounded.

FBI rules out terrorism. I think what they meant to claim is that this wasn't the work of an Islamic terrorist cell or an attack by domestic extremists. By any measure, this was a terror attack, no matter who the shooters or victims were.

Casualty figures have grown to 9 dead and 30 wounded.

12 KIA, 31 WIA, shooters confirmed as soldiers, at least one of which had a "Arabic-sounding name".

Briefing:

Twelve people were killed and 31 wounded in a shooting at Fort Hood on Thursday, officials confirmed.

Ford Hood spokesman Sgt. Tim Volkert said the shooting occurred at 1:30 p.m. A military briefing at 4 p.m. said three assailants, all soldiers, fired shots at the Soldiers Readiness Processing Center and the Howze Theater next to it.

The facts of the story have solidified. Thee was one shooter, an American Major who used two handguns. Details here.

Ghosts of Campaigns Past

Earlier this week I read and commented upon Special Forces Major Jim Gant's proposal for winning the Afghan war, One Tribe At a Time (PDF). Gan't proposla was based upon his highly successful engagement as the leader of a Special Forces A-team that won the confidence of and became regarded as part of a Pushtun tribe.

Gant's approach suggests using smaller teams of highly-trained and highly-supported soldiers and have them assimilate into Afghanistan's Pashtun tribes to combat the Taliban with minimal but immediate assistance, both monetary and military, as needed.

David Adams and Ann Marlowe reach a similar conclusion in the Wall Street Journal today, noting that more troops applied improperly actually seems to make attempts at providing security counterproductive:

We saw how this could work in the Tani district of Khost starting in 2007. By assisting an ANA company—with a platoon of American paratroopers, a civil affairs team from the U.S.-led Provincial Reconstruction Team, the local Afghan National Police, and a determined Afghan subgovernor named Badi Zaman Sabari—we secured the district despite its long border with Pakistan.

Raids by the paratroopers under the leadership of Lt. Col. Scott Custer were extremely rare because the team had such good relations with the tribes that they would generally turn over any suspect. These good tribal relations were strengthened further by meeting the communities' demands for a new paved road, five schools, and a spring water system that supplies 12,000 villagers.

Yet security has deteriorated in Khost, despite increases of U.S. troops in mid-2008. American strategy began to focus more on chasing the insurgents in the mountains instead of securing the towns and villages where most Khostis live.

The insurgents didn't stick around to get shot when they saw the American helicopters coming. But the villagers noticed when the roads weren't built on time and the commanders never visited.

It doesn't take much more more than a scan of the current headlines to know that the application of the current strategy is not working. We also have multiple sources with boots-on-the-ground experience suggesting what certainly sounds like the same approach to a much more intimate, smaller-scale engagement, with real-world results supporting their positions.

No doubt General McCrystal has his reasons for wanting 40,000 troops, just as Joe Biden has his own (quite daft) reasons for wanting to fight a drone war.

But generals and politicians have historically had problems correctly fighting the war in front of them, haunted by ghosts of campaigns past.

Let's hope our current commanders are capable of avoiding that trap.

The Generals Trap

Memeorandum is abuzz over this article in the Washington Post. It seems that a former Marine Captain with combat experience in Iraq who had joined the State Department in the Zabul province of Afghanistan resigned in September becuase of waht he viewed as a pointless war.

The official, Matthew Hoh, wrote in his letter of resignation:

"I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan,"' he wrote Sept. 10 in a four-page letter to the department's head of personnel. "I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end."

Mr. Hoh is far from being the only American with questions about how we are executing strategy in Afghanistan, and for that matter, in Pakistan. As Michael Yon has been warning for over a year, things in Afghanistan are not going as well as they have in Iraq. We're not winning. We may be losing. All that seems certain is that whatever we are doing now isn't working.

There are more opinions that I can cite on what people want us to do in Afghanistan.

There are know-nothing defeatists on the left that desire an American defeat as a mark against President Bush's legacy. Such a view is perverse, but not unexpected from those that became enslaved to a singular hatred over eight years that have turned them into little more than Gollum, trapped in what one fevered progressive blogger described as "one long, sustained scream."

Opposing them are those with more rational reasons for advocating for policies of withdrawal or various strategies that refocus on continuing the effort.

U.S. General Stanley McCrystal wants to commit a much larger American force of 40,000 to attack the Taliban in what some are referring to as the Afghan Surge, likening it to the military operation in Iraq that did much to bring the country to a relative level of stability and enabled U.S. forces to mostly withdraw to supporting roles.

Others such as Vice President Joe Biden, want to reduce the U.S. footprint within Afghanistan and snipe at Taliban and al Qaeda terrorists with Hellfire missiles fired from the ever-present Predator UAVs circling overhead in some area.

And of course, all of our engagement strategies hinge on collaborating with an Afghan government that means almost nothing outside of Kabul.

But there is no guarantee that either increasing our conventional ground forces nor reeling them back in and remotely targeted suspect foes will affect any sort of meaningful change in the remote regions of Afghanistan. The tribes have defeated and outlasted armies that have fought with much greater ferocity and less regard for human life for longer periods of time. The enemy knows that they do not have to defeat us in battle. They can simply afford to watch us burn ourselves out.

That is not to say that the war is unwinnable. We just need to take a fresh look at how the human terrain is different in Afghanistan, and rededicate ourselves to fighting the current war, and not fall into the ever-present generals trap of fighting the last war.

For all intents and purposes, the American war in Iraq is over, and we won. We deposed a dictator, foundered in a bloody insurgency and near civil war over a number of years, before alighting on a strategy that fit the war. Once those tactics were discovered and put into widespread use, the bulk of the insurgency collapsed or was coerced into giving up, leading us to a current state where American forces spend their time on base or in training roles, and the Iraqi government has become a more or less functional state. Terrorist attacks like the double vehicle bombings of several days ago still spread terror and mayhem, but no overtly longer threaten the stability of the state. There is now hope from politicians and generals of using the lessons learned in Iraq to fight the Afghan war.

But the commanders and politicians have learned the wrong lessons.

They focus on the strategy and tactics of military conflict and diplomacy between governments because that is how they are comfortable thinking. They seek to apply what they think they learned in Iraq, while forgetting how they learned.

They learned from "boots on the ground" who found out what worked by living with the population and learning that mastering the human terrain is far more important than building firebases.

One man who seems to understand the human terrain in Afghanistan better than most is U.S. Army Special Forces operator Major Jim Gant, who was deeply and personally embedded with his team in Mangwel, Konar Province.

Based upon his experiences in Afghanistan, Major Gant wrote about the concept of winning the war through tribal engagement in One Tribe at a Time (PDF).

Regular readers of Confederate Yankee know that I commented frequently about the conflict in Iraq during it's most trying times, but that I've been almost silent on Afghanistan. The reason is simple: I had few contacts there, and little understanding of the nature of the people or the conflict. I wasn't going to opine on a war that I simply don't understand in the slightest.

Thanks to One Tribe at a Time I have a far greater understanding of at least Major Gant's view of how to conduct the war. While I'm open to hear other opinions, his experience and the course he advocates sounds like an approach at least worth studying.

I have a suspicion that if we continue to listen to just the politicians and generals, we may once again stagger on with the wrong strategy, creating a war that we cannot win because our greatest adversary is ourselves.

(h/t Instapundit)

Still Raw, Still Visceral

Eight years later, all I can clearly remember is the sinking feeling in my gut and the unnaturally blue skies we had in the Hudson Valley that morning.

This says so much more than my words can.

Via Instapundit, on Facebook.

Democratic Strategist Involved in Bombing

Going with the Bill Ayers model of community activism, I guess.

(h/t Gateway Pundit)

I'll be very interested to see how today's revelations about various left-wing bomb plots will raise a cry in the media about the dangers of left wing terrorism... you know, the kind the Southern Poverty Law Center can't be bothered to Google up a fake report about for the Justice Department to disseminate as propaganda.

Must be One of Those Right Wing Terrorists

Ready it quickly, before Katyanne Marie Kibby's threat to murder a bomb plot informant goes down the memory hole:

A Texas woman faces trial this month in Austin on charges she threatened to kill a government informant who infiltrated an Austin-based group that planned to bomb the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn., last fall.

Katyanne Marie Kibby, 25, was indicted in June by a federal grand jury in Austin. She is accused of retaliating against Brandon Darby, the community activist-turned-informant who helped federal prosecutors win convictions against Bradley Neal Crowder, 24, and David Guy McKay, 23.

Prosecutors say the e-mail threat was made Jan. 10. That was two days after Crowder reached a plea bargain with federal prosecutors in Minneapolis for his role in the plot to build Molotov cocktails and attack the GOP convention in September 2008.

Crowder and McKay were part of a group of activists that had gone to the Twin Cities to take part in street demonstrations. The FBI had infiltrated the group with Darby. Crowder and McKay built eight of the gasoline firebombs but didn't use them, a fact law enforcement officials credited to Darby.

Members of the Austin protest community heaped scorn on Darby, saying he had betrayed longtime friends and colleagues.

Note that the Statesman mentions the target of the bomb plot was Republican, but declines to state to which political affiliation the bomb-building activists subscribe.

As Glenn Reynolds notes, it's all about protecting the narrative.

"War Ramping Up"

From Michael Yon, two hours ago with no further explanation:

On the move but will Twitter this right now!

War ramping up here in Afghanistan.

Unhinged, or a Terror Suspect

A 53-year-old Quogue, NY woman has been charged with third degree trespassing—not exactly national news.

That she was arrested while snapping pictures at the perimeter of an Air National base and was found armed with a shotgun, semi-automatic Bushmaster XM15 (and M4-style carbine) and over 500 rounds of ammunition is something that should be getting this story quite a bit more attention that it has so far.

The end of the story seems to hint that authorities think she might have psychiatric problems, but that doesn't mean she was any less of a potential threat.

I Kill You!

Rusty notes that they've found the Facebook page of one of the Tarheel terrorist-wannabes from Willow Springs. He has the pictures, but I have the video.

Follow along until the end... you'll get a bonus North Carolina tie in, the payoff for martyrdom that perhaps Danial Boyd was really hoping for.

NY Times Botches Complaint Against NC Jihadists

Lets see if you can catch the false and repeated refrain from the newspaper of record:

The three men, along with four others, are charged with stockpiling automatic weapons and traveling abroad numerous times to participate in jihadist movements. There is no indication in the indictment that they were planning attacks in the United States, though prosecutors said they had practiced military tactics this summer in a rural county close to Virginia.

...

Federal officials in Washington said that the men charged on Monday were not seen as serious terrorist threats to the United States or American interests abroad, and that there were no indications of ties to Al Qaeda or other militant groups. But the officials said there was concern that they were amassing a sizable number of automatic weapons, given Mr. Boyd’s record as a foreign fighter.

If you guessed that there weren't any automatic weapons involved in this case, you guessed right.

As noted in some detail yesterday, the indictment cites the exact firearms owned by Daniel Boyd, and not a single one of them was an automatic weapon. The weapons cited in the indictment were 8 intermediate-caliber semi-automatic rifles, 2 semi-automatic battle rifles, a bolt-action rifle, and a revolver.

So much for those multiple layers of fact checkers...

The Guns of the Terrorists Next Door

As you may know, seven men in Willow Springs, NC have been detained on terrorism charges, and an eighth man is still at large.

It's a bit shocking that Islamic terrorists could be hiding in plain sight in a small Southerner town, but that appears to be exactly the case.

And for such a small cell of just eight men, they seemed to be working on a sizable cache of weaponry according to the indictment, including 8 intermediate-caliber semi-automatic rifles, 2 battle rifles, a bolt-action rifle, and a revolver.

I've categorized them by name, type, and date purchased below:

The M70B1, which was not linked, is just another run-of-the-mill fixed-stock AK-style rifle.

You may note that the AR- and AK style rifles are what our politicians have labeled "assault weapons," even though they are not assault rifles by any military definition. Prohibitionists may be quick to point out that the AK- and AR- rifles were some of those banned under the Joe Biden-authored abortion known as the 1994 Assault Weapons ban. This is the same ineffective law that our President and Attorney General would like to have reinstated.

The Saiga 308 purchased by Boyd is built upon the exact same AK action, fires a cartridge with the same rate of fire and having both far more range and power.

The two Ruger Mini-14s and Ruger Mini-30 in this arsenal use the same cartridges and have the same range and rate of fire as the AK- and AR- pattern rifles, and they were never subject in any way to restrictions of the so-called "ban."

Nearly identical relatives of the Bushmaster M4 A3 rifle were available during the entire life of the so-called ban, and that if the Smith & Wesson M&P had been around at the time, a variant of it, too, would have likely been legal for civilian sale.

If Boyd had been interested in the other AK-pattern rifles that he amassed he could have purchased those during the ban as well, though he would have paid a premium for them. While illegal to import, the thousands already in circulation were entirely legal to buy and sell.

Tell me again how gun control "works"...

Angel in Iraq

I don't have the words.

Iranian "Moderate" Mousavi Belongs in Gitmo

Via Hot Air comes the news that the "moderate" Iranian opposition leader Mirhossein Mousavi is the Butcher of Beirut, responsible for the terrorist attack on the U.S. Marine Corps barracks that killed 241 servicemen.

I said it before, and I'll say it again:

No matter who eventually prevails, the Iranian government will still continue their drive to build nuclear weapons. They will still fund terrorists. They will still train terrorists in their country to kill civilians in Israel. They will still train terrorists to kill American soldiers in Iraq.

What I didn't know at the time is that the Iranian opposition leader already had gallons of U.S. blood on his hands, and is by any rational measure is a terrorist.

Please tell me once again why which despot they put in power really matters to me... or you.

White Supremacist Attacks Holocaust Museum; Guard Killed, Shooter in Critical Condition

Left wing blogosphere filled with smug satisfaction.

By now I'm sure you have heard the news that 88-year-old white supremacist James W. von Brunn attacked the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC today. Security officer Stephen Tyrone Johns died confronting Brunn, who was in turn struck down by return fire from another security officer. Because of the professionalism and quick response from the Museum's security team, no patrons were injured in the attack.

I'd ask you to please consider praying for the Johns family and the soul of Officer Johns, who gave his life protecting his fellow citizens.

Sadly, and with tedious predictability, opportunistic left-wing bloggers triumphantly rushed to use the attack as a political bludgeon.

Taylor Marsh's response was typical, proclaiming the attack as vindication for a shoddily-written document released by the Department of Homeland Security and initially defended by DHS Janet Napolitano before she was forced to retract it in embarrassment.

Marsh began gloating before Officer Johns was even cold:

We have a real escalation of domestic terrorism unfolding in the United States. Something Janet Napolitano warned about in her homeland security report, for which Republicans eviscerated her. She was ringing the warning bell, which as we've seen lately was fully warranted.

Of course, Marsh's hopeful vindication of Napolitano is based upon wishful thinking, and bears little resemblance to reality.

The DHS report was panned—and later withdrawn—because the report was heavily political in nature, unfairly tarring a broad set of conservative and libertarian values as being indicators of terrorist intentions, as exposed by Roger Hedgecock and Stephen Gordon, who cited offending passages including this one:

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

It was the broad generalization of this report that earned it criticism, for casting a net so wide that it ensnared Americans with patently mainstream ideas, such as thinking that the government exists to serve the people, or that a government needs to control its borders and favor its citizens over illegal aliens, or for believing that Constitutional Amendments are actually important.

The report cast a net broad enough that it encompassed both museum shooter von Brunn and infanticide doctor killer Scott Roeder. It was also broad enough that it would include almost every adherent of a mainstream religion, a significant portion of Congress, most of middle America, the entire Border Patrol, and the father of the 35th President, just to name a few.

Broad incompetence is not something to crow victoriously about as if were a virtue.

Except, perhaps, for certain apologists for incompetence.

An Ideologue's World

The flash was blinding and disorienting, and Hassan dropped to his knees as a roar like the end of the world shook the ground under him. The sky over Jericho dimmed and he turned west to see a mushroom cloud rising above Tel Aviv... or where Tel Aviv once was.

"The Shia have killed us all," he whispered, and he sat down to die.

For now, this vision of the end of the Cradle of Civilization— the realization of the so-called Samson option by a dying Israel in response to an Iranian nuclear strike —is fiction.

Our President, however, seems unwilling to take repeated Iranian threats to destroy Israel at face value, just as he ignores that nation's continued development of long-range missiles and nuclear warheads.

He pretends to believe that Iran has a need or desire for peaceful nuclear energy instead of the beginning of Armageddon. His is a childish belief of a man who has never been a leader but has always been an ideologue in a political movement cowed by an irrational and suicidal belief of moral equivalence between good and evil when it admits that they even exist at all. He says we cannot impose our values—life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—on nations with murderous histories and hate-consumed cultures.

Better to let them live out their fantasies of genocide, no matter how many millions die, than be a man who has to make difficult decisions.

Where King's Bill Would Have Failed

Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, the American Muslim convert that shot two local soldiers outside of a Little Rock military recruiting station, was on a FBI watch list after all, not that it did any good:

The suspect arrested in the fatal shooting of one soldier and the critical injury of another at a Little Rock, Ark., Army recruiting booth today was under investigation by the FBI's Joint Terrorist Task Force since his return from Yemen, ABC News has learned.

...

Officers who searched the car found more than 100 rounds of ammunition, an SKS assault rifle, two pistols, and two military books.

The ammunition was loaded in magazines which were found in a vest, police sources say.

You can expect at least lip service for Peter King's H.R.2159: Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009 to pick up steam in the wake of the Little Rock attack that killed soldier William Long and the killing of an infanticide specialist in a Wichita church the day before.

Denying terrorists the means by which to carry out their attacks is something we can all get behind on both sides, but I can't find anything in King's bill to suggest that Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad or Scott Roeder would have been effectively denied access to firearms even if King's proposed bill was already established law.

Roeder's Freemen fringe is known to be well-armed and not prone to having any respect for federal laws—indeed, the defining characteristic of this and similar groups is that they do not respect federal authority—and I rather doubt King's proposed law would be the one they decided to follow.

Likewise, Muhammad could easily obtain arms via other, non-legal means.

As it stands, I haven't seen law enforcement or media reports that established how either of these domestic terrorists obtained their firearm. That said, we do know that another law, however well-intentioned, would not have been the slightest impediment to these killers.

African-American Muslim Convert Guns Down Two Soldiers at Little Rock Recruiting Station

The political apparatus behind Homeland Security is obviously not tracking the right extremists:

A Muslim convert who said he was opposed to the U.S. military shot two soldiers outside an Arkansas recruiting station, killing one of the soldiers, police said Monday.

"This individual appears to have been upset with the military, the Army in particular, and that's why he did what he did," Little Rock Police Lt. Terry Hastings said in a phone interview.

"He has converted to Muslim here in the past few years," Hastings said. "To be honest we're not completely clear on what he was upset about. He had never been in the military."

Hastings identified the man in custody as Carlos Bledsoe, 24, of Little Rock, who was going by the name of Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad.

It seems like it was just within the past few weeks—because it was—that another group of African-American Muslim converts attempted to carry out terrorist attacks against American citizens.

Has anyone heard of Homeland Security or the Justice Department issuing warnings to law enforcement agencies to be looking for signs of suspicious activity from this very specific pool of potential terrorists? Before they struck twice in the past two weeks, I mean.

I'd love to hear from those of you in law enforcement if such a warning had been issued.

I'd hate to think that our current Presidential Administration would rather ignore the uncomfortable realities of real terrorist threats in favor of playing to the comforting silence of identity politics... but considering President Obama's ties to certain terrorists/authors and the 20 years he spent in the congregation of a racial separatist church, I wouldn't put it past Dear Leader, either.

Obama Holds Israeli Helicopters and Weapons Integration Hostage, Benefiting Hamas and Putting Civilians at Risk

In a move that a cynic might note may be designed to save their $900 million investment in Hamas, the Obama Administration has stepped in to block the sale of six Apache helicopters to Israel and also stopped the integration of the Spike missile system with the Apache's millimeter wave radar.

The Obama administration has blocked Israel's request for advanced U.S.-origin attack helicopters.

Government sources said the administration has held up Israel's request for the AH-64D Apache Longbow attack helicopter. The sources said the request was undergoing an interagency review to determine whether additional Longbow helicopters would threaten Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip.

"During the recent war, Israel made considerable use of the Longbow, and there were high civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip," a source close to the administration said.

What a naked, ideologically-driven crock.

Obama's Administration, which apparently has little knowledge of or use for military systems, does not seem to grasp that the use of the Longbow's mast-mounted sensor suite enables it to more carefully select targets that other variants of the Apache, which in and of themselves are a better targeting, surveillance, and attack system than most alternatives.

Nor do they seem to grasp that the close air support function of helicopters with lighter weapons loads is less likely to cause the collateral deaths of civilians than other weapons systems that would have to step into the suppression role that helicopters typically occupy.

Artillery units (in Israel, typically 155mm self-propelled howitzers) fire salvos of "dumb" high explosive or incendiary shells that either burst above the target (spraying shrapnel over a wide area), point detonate on impact, or less frequently, on a time delay that lets them penetrate structures before exploding. But artillery is not designed to be a precision weapon, and Obama's decision could force the Israeli's to use this area weapon, directly putting civilian lives at risk.

The other option for the Israeli's if these Apache's are out of the picture are "fast movers" such as the F-15i and and F16i, fighter-bombers armed with bombs weighing hundreds or thousands of pounds. While they can be armed with precision weapons, the warheads on these munitions are typically larger than those of helicopter mounted weapons. Once again, this creates a situation where the Israeli's are boxed into a less-than-optimal weapons system and put civilians at greater risk of death because of an ignorant decision made by a neophyte's Administration trying to play hardball not with an enemy, but an ally.

The net result is that Obama's short-sightedness and inexperience is potentially leading to a situation that will increase the collateral damage of Israeli strikes, even if the strikes are carried out with the utmost care, because Obama has blocked the sale and integration of the most precise and surgical weapons system available to handle the threat.

Instead of being able to target a Hamas rocket team that has retreated into the garage of an apartment building with a Longbow's precision gunfire or a pinpoint missile strike, Obama's decisions may lead to Israel being boxed into a position where their options are to respond with artillery strikes that run the risk of bringing down the building and spraying everyone nearby with shrapnel, or bombing the building with fighter aircraft armed with bombs large enough to flatten the building and kill everyone inside it.

Obama stupidly thinks that by denying Israel precision-strike capable aircraft and precisions munitions integration that Israel might not fire on the Palestinian terrorists he's provided more money to than anyone but Iran. He thinks he's protecting his investment. Israel, however, does not suffer terrorist rocket attacks on it's neighborhoods and schools, nor should they.

Those innocent Palestinians that may die as a result of this shortsightedness need look no further for a culprit that then man who hides behind the fence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

(h/t Bookworm)

Shocker: NY Muslim Terrorists Were Losers, "Intellectually Challenged"

More is coming out about the four Newburgh men who were arrested in a plot to carry out attacks on synagogues in New York City and shoot down C5 Galaxy transport aircraft at Stewart ANG base in Newburgh.

You'll hardly find it surprising that the terror team is bunch of dead-end convicts who converted to Islam in prison, and that none are a threat to join Mensa:

One is a petty criminal who spent a day in 2002 snatching purses and shooting at people with a BB gun from an SUV. His lawyer calls him "intellectually challenged."

Three have histories of drug convictions, one of them for selling narcotics in a school zone. The man prosecutors portrayed as the instigator of the scheme said he smoked pot the day he planned to blow up the temples.

In other words, if they hadn't decided to become terrorists, they would have fit perfectly in ACORN.

As it is, one of the uncles of the suspects feels that he knows where to place the blame:

"The Onta I know wouldn't do something like this, but the new Onta, yeah," said Richard Williams, an uncle. "He wasn't raised this way. All this happened when he became a Muslim in prison."

It's interesting how people who convert to just about any other religion in prison—say, Christianity as a popular choice—come out of prison and often use their newfound zeal as a convert to make something out of their lives.

A blogger friend of mine recently remarked in a private email (hence no name) about how her brother turned his life around after going to prison and finding God there. The one-time petty criminal and recreational drug user is now clean and sober and found a work ethic that has amazed his sister. He now owns a commercial landscaping company. He recently purchased ten acres of land with a pond, and just started building a dream home with his new bride. All of this occurred just six years after he walked out of the prison gates with nothing but his faith and support form his family. He gives all the credit for his phenomenal success in such a short amount of time to God.

If James Cromitie, David Williams, Onta Williams and Laguerre Payen has been successful in their quest to carry out murderous synagogue bombings in Riverdale and managed to bring down a C5 Galaxy carrying even part of its full fuel load of 332,500 pounds—enough to fill more than six railcars—and managed to burn a massive swath of their hometown to the ground—perhaps the massive jet veering into the 2,700 student Newburgh Free Academy (which is very near a landing jet's flight path) in the worst, worst case scenario—they would no doubt give all the "glory" of their massacres to Allah.

It is interesting, and sometimes insane what adherents of different religions think brings glory to their God, and worth noting that what these converts would have lauded as the will of their God parallels what we would expect from the will of Satan himself.

As for Masjid al-Ikhlas, the mosque these men shared on Washington Terrace in Newburgh, I'd like to hope that they were not involved in the plot in any way, or were working with the authorities in bringing down this band of murder-minded misfits. If they were encouraging jihad, however, I hope the authorities shut them down.

There is a freedom of religion in this country, but that stops when the individual practitioners or promoters of the religion use it to destroy the lives of others.

Update: And radicals they are. Phyllis Chesler does some digging and reveals the radical Islamist roots fo Masjid al-Ikhlas.

Perhaps Peter King or another New York politician should consider finding a way to close such radical centers that seem to do little more than condone and organize criminals to become indoctrinated mass murderers.

These Are the Terrorists In Your Neighborhood

When I lived in Newburgh, New York I had a paper route that took me down Washington Terrace, an utterly forgettable section of road in an ugly part of worn-out town.

It's beena few years, but the mosque one source calls Masjid Al Jihad Al Akbar (the local paper calls it Masjid al-Ikhlas, but puts it at the same address) was a worn-looking Islamic Center on Washington Terrace that never seemed to have anyone around when I drove past. If news accounts are correct, the two-story building that may be the only mosque in Newburgh was most likely a link between four Muslim terrorists that were attempting to bomb synagogues in Brooklyn and try to shoot down aircraft with Stinger missiles at Stewart ANG base.

The FBI busted a homegrown terror cell late Wednesday night as the men sneaked around a Jewish temple in Riverdale planting what they thought was packages of C-4 explosives, sources told the Daily News.

The four African American men, three of whom were said to be jailhouse converts to Islam, also allegedly had what they believed was a working Stinger missile in their car.

Officials said they hoped to shoot down a plane at Stewart Air National Guard Base in Newburgh in Orange County.

Sources said the four men were arrested after a year-long investigation that began when an informant connected to a mosque in Newburgh said he knew men who wanted to buy explosives.

FBI agents posing as militants sold them what they thought was 30 pounds of C-4 and a plane-downing Stinger missile.

The weaponry was all phony.

The ANG plane most often flown out of Stewart is the massive C5 Galaxy, on a predictable flight path that would make the plane a relatively easy target as it came in for landings from any of a hundred possible launch sites along Route 17K or Route 300, with easy escape routes to nearby interstates just minutes away.

I remember that after 9/11 some locals grumbled about wanting to burn down Masjid Al Jihad Al Akbar. In retrospect, if it is the mosque where terrorists came to plot, then finding some way to shut the mosque down certainly seems like an idea worth considering.

Update: Confirmed. The mosque's imam is an ex-con who di d a 12-year stretch for robbery and is the protegee of another Imam who was fired for praising the terror attacks of 9/11.

Hustled: How Obama Deceived America About a Drawdown in Iraq and a "Surge" In Afghanistan By Playing With The Lives Of American Soldiers

This post from milblogger Greyhawk is a must-read.

It is relatively rare when we see a situation where people from both ends of the political spectrum and all points in between can unite for any reason, but using the lives of soldiers as political props is certainly one of them.

Here's the summary:

President Obama, apparently seeking to keep the anti-war left firmly under his spell, announced that he was drawing down American forces in Iraq, and was instead diverting forces who had trained specifically for an Iraqi deployment to Afghanistan.

Less than a month later, another unit's scheduled deployment to Iraq is sped up, in order to keep the same number of Stryker brigades in Iraq as there would have been if he hadn't shipped the other unit to Afghanistan.

The President ordered a unit that had trained for ten months specifically for the Iraqi mission to another part of the world that speaks a different language and has entirely different cultures. There is no easy way to determine on a Sunday night how many tens of millions of training dollars and man-hours Obama wasted by shifting this Stryker brigade, but if the Iraqi theater really didn't need them, it at least could have been understandable.

But the Iraqi theater clearly did need a Stryker brigade, and he planned on sending one all along.

We know this because just as soon as the Obama White House sold the drawdown story to the media and the anti-war left, he immediately and quietly ordered that another Stryker brigade—one that is no doubt capable, but one that didn't have the specific, intensive training of the unit diverted to Afghanistan— rushed to Iraq months ahead of schedule in order to keep the same number of Stryker brigades (two) as there has been the entire time.

There is no drawdown of Stryker brigades in Iraq.

President Obama lied to the American people.

He tried to con those who are against the Iraq war into thinking we were actually drawing down our capabilities there, when all he actually did was use a street-hustler's sleight-of-hand, having us watch one hand moving a unit out of Iraq, while using his other hand to deftly slide in another.

To borrow a phrase: you been lied to. Bamboozled. Run amok.

By a hustler who's been playing you the entire time.

And for those of us who know people in the military, be they friends or family, you should be absolutely livid at the callous disregard with which our punk of a President used the lives of two entire brigades of soldiers and their families as pawns.

The military life is never easy. Not ever. Our troops and spouses know that, and the kids, well, they learn to cope as best they can. There is always pride, but always uncertainty, and little things can make a difference for both the morale of the soldiers and those who carry on in their absence.

Knowing that our soldiers are highly trained for a specific mission makes them feel more confident of success, and more confident they'll have a better chance to come home. Having nearly a year's training wasted—and then finding out several weeks later that all that training was wasted because of political theater orchestrated to benefit your selfish Commander-in-Chief—well, I can only assume that hurts morale. Not just the morale of the troops, mind you, but that of their families, to see how little he cares about those he commands. And that's just the 5th Stryker Brigade.

The 4th Stryker Brigade's soldiers are being rushed to Iraq to keep two Stryker Brigades there. Did they get in all the specialized training they needed? They'll no doubt rush to get it done. But are those soldiers and their families being cheated of time together because Barack Obama is using them to play a cynical political game where he tries to lie to America about the wars we're fighting?

Absolutely.

Anyone who has done any research into who Barack Obama is, instead of who he likes to claim who he is, can't be very surprised that he would so cynically manipulate others for personal political gain.

What is surprising is how brazen his abuses are, and how quickly they've come.

Update: "It looks as if the Obama administration is so self involved, the only game it’s playing is a shell game with itself and the American people."

Obama Administration Supports Hamas Rebuilding, While Shorting Anti-Terrorism Funding in Pakistan

We're still fighting a war against radical Islamic terrorism, and it already appears that our inept President has forgotten which side he's supposed to be on.

The Department of Defense's Security Development Plan for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan, like the administration's $900 million Gaza aid plan, is directed at the heart of a terrorist haven. But the DoD initiative is directed at curtailing and/or cutting off terrorists from narcotics funding and undermining their stranglehold on and, to the degree that it exists, popular support of the local populations there. An alternative.

The Administration's Gaza reconstruction gift contains none of these counterterrorism dynamics. Not a one. There is but one ultimate distributor in Gaza: Hamas. The Obama administration can claim that "the aid would not go to Hamas but that it would be funneled through nongovernmental organizations," but the fact of the matter remains that the Hamas terrorist organization that dominates Gaza stands to gain from every penny. It most certainly will not be hindered. That equation is nowhere in the calculus.

The Testing Begins

One thing America's enemies expect in Barack Obama is weakness, and they aren't wasting any time testing him:

Right now, man, lately, we've been under some INSANE level of incoming… like compared to 2004, not so much, but considering that when I got here, it'd been over 9-10 months since any, mind you, ANY rounds hit, and for like 3 days/nights in a row we've had between 2 to 4 incoming rounds.

Expect an uptick in attacks on American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan and perhaps elsewhere as terrorists and tyrants probe the incoming Obama Administration to see what the 44th President is made of.

Hope. Change. Explosives.

I'm hoping this is a hoax:

A Massachusetts man stopped by police along the New Jersey Turnpike amid a suspicion that he was taking explosives to Washington, D.C., prompted a 25-mile closure of the highway east of Philadelphia on Tuesday evening.

At about 6:30 p.m., New Jersey State Police closed the turnpike at exit 1 through exit 4 as a precaution. State troopers, FBI agents and turnpike officials continued to investigate along the highway that leads south to Washington.

New Jersey State Police spokesman Sgt. Stephen Jones said troopers took a 27-year-old man into custody following a car stop in the southbound lanes of the turnpike near Exit 3 in Woodbury Heights.

Know who this benefits?

Mitt Romney.

Update: false alarm.

Another Leftist/Islamist Lie Up In Smoke

It doesn't seem that we can have a conflict in the Middle East without pro-terrorist Islamists and Leftists in the world declaring that white phosphorus (WP) is a chemical weapon, and that the military force using WP is guilty of a "war crime" or "atrocity" for firing white phosphorus shells—never mind that that Islamist force targets civilians, uses their own population as human shields, and commits rape and torture with barbaric impunity to those they suppress.

Such apologist claims, almost without exception, based upon either radical politics, gross ignorance, or a combination of the two. In either event, these shrill claims are decidedly false.

A typical case of ignorance is the one I cited several days ago in the Pacific Free Press where the headline called the use of White Phosphorus by Israeli forces in Gaza the " War Crime du Jour."

Likewise, "Cernig," posting at Crooks & Liars, posted an equally inflammatory, fact-free and generally unhinged rant on the subject:

And there are good reasons to believe that the IDF is simply lying as part of a propaganda war it admits has been eight months in the planning: the use of indiscriminate white phosphorus airbursts, in contravention of international law as it is understood everywhere except the US and Israel (the 1980 Protocol III to the Convention on Conventional Weapons containsa blanket restriction on dropping incendiary weapons from the air against military objectives "located within a concentration of civilians"); the way in which the IDF is throwing explosives around so freely that almost as many of its people have been killed by its own "errant' tank shells as by enemy action.

Like most Leftists, Cernig is quick to pick and choose his atrocities of choice, completely ignoring that Hamas purposefully targeted Israeli civilians with thousands of rockets and mortar shells, in order for him to attack Israel by purposefully (and ignorantly) misconstruing what the laws of land warfare are, and what white phosphorus munitions are being used, and how.

The Israelis are not firing White Phosphorus incendiary weapons into Gaza.

This photo from Gil Cohen Magen two days ago shows Israeli 155mm M825A1 white phosphorus shells, with "M825A1" written clearly on the sides. I've cropping the image to focus on the M825A1 shells.

Update: A higher-resolution crop showing the shell markings more clearly.

Likewise, this photo posted today shows more Israeli 155mm M825A1 shells near a self-propelled gun.

Clearly, Israeli forces are using 155mm M825A1 white phosphorus shells in Gaza. But the white phosphorus shells they are using in Gaza are not incendiaries, and they are not being used in any way that can possibly be misconstrued as illegal.

Why?

Because the M825A1 is a smoke round.

From Global Security:

The M825 is a 155mm Smoke projectile used to provide screening or marking smoke. It is a separate loading munition using a hollow forged steel shell. The shape is ogival with a boat tail for aerodynamic efficiency and a welded steel baseplate. Close to the base is a gilding metal drive band protected by a grommet until just before loading.

The M825 White Phosphorus (Felt-Wedge) is a 155mm base ejection projectile designed to produce a smoke screen on the ground for a duration of 5 to 15 minutes. It consists of two major components, the projectile carrier, and the payload. The projectile carrier delivers the payload to the target. The payload consists of 116 WP-saturated felt wedges.After ejection, the WP felt wedges fall to ground in a elliptical pattern. Each wedge will then becomes a source of smoke. The projectile is ballistically similar to the M483A1 DPICM family of projectiles.

Smoke ammunition is a limited asset. Since ammunition requirements vary with each mission, observers should know the amount and types of smoke ammunition available and how many minutes of coverage it can provide. Extensive, planned smoke employment should be coordinated early with firing units to allow for redistribution or requisition of ammunition.

That's the short version.

The full article goes into far more detail about the nuance about the difference between the use of "quick smoke" and "immediate smoke" for battlefield missions, but one thing is painfully obvious—these are artillery shells and they contain white phosphorus, but they are not incendiary weapons, and they are not, by any remote measure, illegal to use in Gaza or anywhere else. They are smoke shells, used to create smoke screens.

The kind of white phosphorus artillery shells used as incendiary munitions are those called burster-type white phosphorus, and Global Security explains the difference between the incendiary and smoke rounds in sufficient detail .

The airburst Cernig and other terrorist apologists laments as an illegal attack is instead how a smokescreen is created to protect advancing soldiers. It is decidedly not an incendiary weapon, is decidedly not illegal, violating no laws or conventions.

Make no mistake—these apologists, Islamists and Leftists alike, are lying, pro-terror shills.

Few nations on Earth exercise as much care in waging a "humane" war as does Israel and the United States.

In this present conflict in particular the IDF has gone to extreme lengths to reduce collateral damage, from the careful selection of targets, to using precision-guided state-of-the-art weaponry to maximize the accuracy of their strikes, to using distinct weapons systems designed with different capabilities to use the absolute minimum of force to destroy terrorist targets, to even going to the extreme of phoning civilians near terrorist targets in order to evacuate them prior to attacks.

As Victor David Hansen notes, Israel has gone to historical lengths to protect a hostile civilian population, even as those hostiles openly back and publicly cheer terrorist attacks—more than 6,000 in recent years—that purposefully target Israeli civilians.

There is no moral middle ground here, but one of the most clear-cut battles between good and evil mankind is likely to ever see on this mortal plane.

If you side with Hamas, you side with evil.

Perhaps, then, I shouldn't be so surprised that so many of Hamas' apologists are so willing to lie for them.

Sacrificial Wolves

It was only a matter of time—Israeli counter-battery radar isolated Hamas mortar shells as they rose, and a computer algorithm quickly did the geometry and isolated the GPS coordinates of the launch location before the terrorist-fired bombs even began their descent.

Israeli counter-fire aimed at the launch site was likely in the air before the Hamas-fired shells impacted near their target of Israeli civilians.

When the Israeli shells impacted the Hamas launch site—a school—the terrorists got just what they wanted.

Israeli forces fighting Hamas in the Gaza Strip struck a school run by the United Nations, killing at least 30 Palestinians hiding in the compound, a UN official said. Israel said it was returning fire from the school.

Christopher Gunness, a spokesman for the UN Relief and Works Agency in Jerusalem, said in a phone interview he could confirm 30 dead and 55 injured, 15 critically, as the result of three Israel artillery shells hitting the school in northern Gaza.

The Israeli army said in a faxed statement late today that its investigations showed that "among the dead in the school were members of the military wing of the Hamas terror organization and a cell firing rockets and mortars at Israeli forces in the area."

Time and again, Hamas terrorists have fired weapons from schools, residential areas, hospitals, and mosques. Often these same sites have been used to store weaponry as well.

An Isreali drone captured a similar Hamas mortar attack launched from the exact same U.N. school two years ago.

Anti-Israeli hypocrites in the world’s media and Islamo-fascist states constantly cry that Israel is guilty of "war crimes" for returning fire against the aggression of various state-sponsored Islamic terrorist groups along its borders, and no doubt will rally against today’s casualties as an example of such.

What they will not admit—and perhaps ideologically, cannot—is that it is Hamas that is clearly guilty of multiple war crimes by any objective measure, as they continually embed militant forces inside civilian structures, population centers, and fire weaponry from within civilian enclaves that they use as human shields.

Perhaps equally as shameful is that the naked hatred of Palestinian culture towards Isreal is so extreme is that even non-combatants are more than willing to have themselves used as human shields, as they view the deaths of their own population as martyrs in a media war as an acceptable cost of attempting genocide against their Jewish neighbors.

Hamas militants did not have to force themselves into this school that recent reports suggest doubled as a weapons depot and firing position, nor in any of the dozens of residential neighborhoods, schools, mosques, and hospitals they’ve illegally weaponized in decades of terrorism. No, they were accepted willingly by Palestinians equally as bent on the destruction of Israel.

Indoctrinated by terror-loving, Jew-demonizing characters from birth on Palestinian television in a culture that lives to hate, fight, and die, there are no innocents here.

The high number of casualties in this particular incident suggests a similar patterns as in previous conflicts. Adoring Palestinians stood too close for too long after their terrorist heroes fired mortars at Israeli civilians. The Palestinians gathered around the launch site to watch munitions being fired against Israel simply didn’t anticipate the speed and accuracy of the Israeli response, and Israeli counter-battery fire detonating additional Hamas weaponry at the school only made the carnage worse.

There is a simple way out of such constant death and misery in Gaza for the Palestinians, a solution the Israelis had hoped for in 2005 when they pulled out of Gaza, giving the Palestinians a chance to form their own state, with their own government.

Instead of prospering and building a future for their children, they squandered their chance, choosing agony and a futile, constant war against an Israeli state that gave them a clear chance for peace and prosperity.

Hamas responded with violence.

All the dead of this war are on the heads of Hamas and the Palestinians that embrace and support them. There are no innocent lambs being slaughtered in Gaza.

Only the deaths of wolves.

Ending Gaza

Let's put this bluntly: the Gaza Strip is a failed non-state run by terrorists pledged to genocide and dreaming of a second Holocaust. It has no discernible reason to exist other than to hate; no notable exports greater than the crude rockets and mortars targeting Israeli civilians for merely daring to exist.

Lets end it. It was a mistake. It's time to close Gaza.

Empty the 1.4 million Gazans living in squalor into the surrounding Arab nations who helped make it a modern Hell. Send them to Egypt. Syria. Jordan. Lebanon. Let these nations deal with the extremism they've midwifed by absorbing the bastard Arabs of the Middle East into their own societies.

Granted, such a repatriation will be welcomed by neither the Arabs of Gaza nor the nations who have to host the violent illiteracy and religious extremism they helped create.

But it is the only viable long-term solution for peace.

And an idea long overdue.

IDF Starts Gaza YouTube Channel; Already Hit With Terms of Use Violations

The Isael Defense forces have started a YouTube channel to show the precision and care they are taking in destroying Hamas terrorist weapons dumps smuggling tunnels, and rocket launching sites located in residential areas by the terrorists. Hamas places the sites among homes and school in hopes that innocent civilians—particularly children—will be killed. Hamas can then use Palestinian and Arab cameramen with sympathies towards their cause to take pictures of the dead and wounded civilians for Hamas' propaganda war, which is typically waged via cameramen from Reuters, AFP, and the Associated Press.

Typically, as in the 2006 war with Hezbollah in Lebanon, these photos are stage managed to varying degrees, while a few are occasionally staged.

Some photos are staged by physically manipulating scenes for news photographers to photograph, though the primary way Hamas manipulates the media is to tightly control their access, limiting photographers to areas where they can take generally only take pictures of dead and wounded civilians and Hamas &qout;police," never allowing them access to photograph bombed weapons smuggling tunnels, missile launching sites, and other legitimate military targets.

The IDF YouTube channel is a vital dissemination tool to counter the propaganda photos staged by Hamas and willingly participated in by the world's media outlets, and so it is perhaps no real surprise that the channel itself is already under attack.

Several of the videos showing the Isreali Air Force hitting Hamas rocket launching sites with GBU-39 precision-guided bombs have been flagged by pro-Hamas (or at least anti-Israeli) users and momentarily removed for terms of use violations before being restored. Some have been removed and have not been restored. Expect this online battle to continue, and perhaps intensify.

Meanwhile, Back in Iraq...

While everyone seems to have shifted their gaze to track Gazans reaping what they've sown, CY commenter Big Country has been busy in Iraq, explaining to State Department VIPS how not to kill themselves and getting bombed... on tequila.

Kinda reminds me of a sandy version of Robert Earl Keen's Merry Christmas From the Family, with body armor.

Because Monsters Are Always Monsters

From the "a zebra can't change its stripes" department comes this lovely story.

Hamas officials say 271 Palestinians have been killed and 600 wounded since Israel began its aerial assault on the Gaza Strip on Saturday, but none of the injured have yet left via Rafah.

Egypt has helicopters and doctors on standby at the Rafah crossing.
There are also up to 40 ambulances waiting to go into Gaza to bring out the most seriously wounded. Tonnes of medical supplies have arrived at the nearby airport of El-Arish.

But the Egyptian authorities say that, at the moment, they have no-one to treat.

Egypt's Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said the wounded were "barred from crossing" and he blamed "those in control of Gaza" for putting the lives of the injured at risk.

The same terrorist organization that Palestinians and leftists worldwide cheer for targeting innocent Israelis for death on a daily basis is now barring their own civilians from getting medical care in hopes of converting their wounded into dead—wailing processions for the media's cameras are the only effective anti-aircraft weapons in Hamas arsenal.

Gazans fail at killing, and when the are killed in response, they kill the survivors. If there has ever been an entire population that is pathological than this one, I'd be interested in knowing who they were. Various Palestinian factions seem intent on this conflict continuing until one side or the other is completely wiped out.

And most times, they don't even seem to care which side.

Bombed in 30 Minutes or Less, Or Your Next One's Free

Israel has finally responded to extensive rocket attacks targeting their civilians with a surprise series of air strikes yesterday against more than 100 Hamas terrorist targets. Air strikes are continuing today, and Israeli ground forces are massing on the border with Gaza.

I'm sure that many people will think that an Israeli ground invasion is all but inevitable.

I also happen to think that Israel's next phase of strikes was banking on Hamas making just that supposition.

Israel's Saturday attacks went after overt Hamas targets in an effort to rattle their proverbial cages, hitting their most visible signs of power, Hamas security stations, armories, tunnels and training camps.

Hamas, trained and back by Iran just like Hezbollah was in 2006, was prepared and braced for a grinding ground war from fixed positions with concurrent and continuing rocket attacks on Israel, in hopes of winning the traditional Arab "victory," of not being utterly wiped off the face of the earth.

Hamas hoped to stall any Israeli ground invasion by making it as costly as possible by forcing Israeli units into ambushes. Overnight, Hamas rushed their terrorist drones to fighting positions along likely Israeli invasion routes to man tank traps and ambush zones. I strongly suspect IAF planners were counting on just that development.

If I'm right, Israeli Air Force planes have been hitting Hamas fortifications filled with eager young terrorists who died waiting for an invasion that will never come. Hamas was suckered into putting their fighters in combat positions while the IAF simply waited for them to show up for their pre-planned bombing runs.

If Gazans weren't part of a genocide-mad death cult I might feel sorry for them, but then I remember that these same terrorists purposefully target Israeli civilians, and that even their kids dance in the streets when Israeli woman and children are killed by Hamas rockets, and I don't feel too bad, at all.

Iraqi Journalist Throws Shoes At Bush in Baghdad

The Secret Service was apparently taking a nap:

Bush got a size-10 reminder of the fervent opposition to his policies when a man threw two shoes at him -- one after another -- during a news conference with Iraq Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

"This is the end!" shouted the man, later identified as Muntadar al-Zeidi, a correspondent for Al-Baghdadiya television, an Iraqi-owned station based in Cairo, Egypt.

Bush ducked both throws. Neither leader was hit. In Iraqi culture, throwing shoes at someone is a sign of contempt; Iraqis whacked a statue of Saddam Hussein with their shoes after U.S. Marines toppled it to the ground in 2003.

"All I can report," Bush joked of the incident, "is a size 10."

White House Press Secretary Dana Perino, however, was hit in the eye with a microphone as security guards scrambled to restrain al-Zeidi.

I saw the video of the event in NBC in a breaking news report, and was stunned that the Secret Service was so slow in responding, allowing the journalist to hurl first one shoe, and then another, at least a full second and perhaps several seconds later.

Granted, shoes aren't know to be lethal projectiles, but my point is that from the angle shown, he seems like he would have had time to hurl a grenade before anyone intervened.

I'm sure progressives are having a good chuckle over this, but rather doubt they'll find similar security breaches amusing when Obama takes over in January.

Update: linked added to 2005 grenade attack on Bush, thanks to a reminder by Jeremy in the comments.

Hot Air now has the video.

20 Terrorists Trained For Mumbai Still At Large

Bad news in the Sydney Morning Herald:

POLICE in Mumbai said the 10 men who carried out the terrorist attacks in November were among 30 recruits selected for suicide missions.

The whereabouts of the other 20 were unknown.

Police released the identities and home addresses in Pakistan of the nine gunmen who died during the attack on India's financial centre - a move designed to increase pressure on the Pakistani Government.

It was the first time Indian police had disclosed the larger number of recruits, all of whom it says belonged to the Pakistani militant organisation Lashkar-e-Taiba. Police said there was no reason to believe the other 20 were in India but expressed concern about that possibility.

"Another 20 were ready to die," Deven Bharti, a Mumbai police deputy commissioner, said. "This is the very disturbing part of it."

Considering the effectiveness of the first batch of terrorists in Mumbai. it would be surprising to see them used anywhere else other than another Indian city, though they may take time to scout out any adjustments in India's defenses that resulted from Mumbai's attacks. They also may also chose to hold off on launching additional attacks if they don't want to provoke a war between Pakistan and India that would likely end their ability to use Pakistan as a sanctuary.

Whether they desire a stable base in Pakistan more than success in India seems to be the key question.

Sovereignty Is Not a Shield

Memeorandum is tracking the buzz on a Rabert Kagan op-ed in the Washington Post, where Kagan offers the idea of—more or less—repossessing the parts of Pakistan where terrorist groups operate and placing them under some sort of international control. The proximate cause of his screed is the multi-day assault carried out by terrorists against civilian targets in Mumbai, India that places nuclear-armed neighbors India and Pakistan on a potential course for war.

He's considered an intellectual for this.

Rather than simply begging the Indians to show restraint, a better option could be to internationalize the response. Have the international community declare that parts of Pakistan have become ungovernable and a menace to international security. Establish an international force to work with the Pakistanis to root out terrorist camps in Kashmir as well as in the tribal areas. This would have the advantage of preventing a direct military confrontation between India and Pakistan. It might also save face for the Pakistani government, since the international community would be helping the central government reestablish its authority in areas where it has lost it. But whether or not Islamabad is happy, don't the international community and the United States, at the end of the day, have some obligation to demonstrate to the Indian people that we take attacks on them as seriously as we take attacks on ourselves?

Would such an action violate Pakistan's sovereignty? Yes, but nations should not be able to claim sovereign rights when they cannot control territory from which terrorist attacks are launched. If there is such a thing as a "responsibility to protect," which justifies international intervention to prevent humanitarian catastrophe either caused or allowed by a nation's government, there must also be a responsibility to protect one's neighbors from attacks from one's own territory, even when the attacks are carried out by "non-state actors."

In Pakistan's case, the continuing complicity of the military and intelligence services with terrorist groups pretty much shreds any claim to sovereign protection. The Bush administration has tried for years to work with both the military and the civilian government, providing billions of dollars in aid and advanced weaponry. But as my Carnegie Endowment colleague Ashley Tellis has noted, the strategy hasn't shown much success. After Mumbai, it has to be judged a failure. Until now, the military and intelligence services have remained more interested in wielding influence in Afghanistan through the Taliban and fighting India in Kashmir through terrorist groups than in cracking down. Perhaps they need a further incentive -- such as the prospect of seeing parts of their country placed in an international receivership.

I agree completely with Kagan on the key point: nation-states that cannot control their territory and have effectively ceded control of large portions to terrorist groups or other "non-state actors" also cede their claims of sovereignty. If a nation-state is attacked from within terrorist-controlled territory, they have the moral right—and I would argue, prime responsibility to their citizens—to respond with crushing military force.

But his solution—"seeing parts of their country placed in an international receivership"—must surely be a joke, or the harried keystrokes of a malformed column that was expelled in grotesque stillborn form.

If the international community were serious about contributing to helping settle territories controlled by terrorists, then Afghanistan would be a nation awash in foreign soldiers on peacekeeping duties and aid workers lavishing the bounty of developed nations on the backwards and downtrodden. Of course, that has not occurred. America's military fights with a largely symbolic handful of allies, most cursed with a lack of support from their home nations and hampered by rules of engagement that preclude them of being any practical use. Aid workers are few and far between in Afghanistan and constantly at risk; infrastructure improvements that would help change ancient incubators of extremism are few and far between. Kagan's idea was debunked by years of international apathy before it was ever written.

Being an intellectual, of course, Kagan feels compelled to re-offer this vinegared vintage yet again, hoping that someone will swallow it.

The simple, pragmatic fact of the matter is that no nation wants the responsibilities of another nation's struggles, but they do have every natural right to defend themselves from attack.

What Kagan cannot bring himself to write is that his beloved international community is disinterested in raising up those fractured territories. As a result of their apathy, they condemn these territories and states to be led by rogue actors, and for those within those areas to suffer reprisals. Some will deserve to die. Some will be innocents. Such is the nature of war.

Pakistan has failed to stop non-state actors from using their territory for international terrorism against their neighbors, and has morally forfeited any claims of sovereignty over the rogue regions of their nation. Indian military forces have every moral right to engage terror bases located in eastern Pakistan, as Afghani forces and coalition allies have even moral right to engage terrorist training camps and bases in the west.

This of course, will not assuage those who claim to represent "peace." Though militant Islam has been constantly at war since 632AD, these idealists, unable to understand other cultures do not think as they do, think negotiating is an answer. The militants, quite rightly, view forcing negotiations upon a far stronger power as evidence that their militancy works.

Among the polite and demure, there simply isn't understanding that sometimes, force can only be met with an overwhelming and punishing response. History shows us that terrorism stops when terrorist groups are crushed, are fractured, or are victorious. All three of those conclusions are dictated by violence.

The question is how much more innocent blood civilized societies will see run in their streets before the inevitable and overwhelming violent response that is required is finally deemed necessary.

Update: Ed Morrissey notes another reason to ignore Kagan's suggestion, primarily, how it would be used against Israel.

NY Times Scurrying To Give Obama Victory Credit For Their Shared Defeat In Iraq

Barack Obama and his Democratic allies have famously done everything in their power to try to lose the Iraqi War while President Bush is in office, but now that everyone with any understanding of the conflict knows that the war is effectively won, Democrats are trying to steal credit for the victory they fought so hard against:

In the last year, though, the U.S. troop surge and the backlash from moderate Iraqi Sunnis against Al Qaeda and Iraqi Shiites against pro-Iranian extremists have brought a new measure of stability to Iraq. There is now, for the first time, a chance — still only a chance — that a reasonably stable democratizing government, though no doubt corrupt in places, can take root in the Iraqi political space.

That is the Iraq that Obama is inheriting. It is an Iraq where we have to begin drawing down our troops — because the occupation has gone on too long and because we have now committed to do so by treaty — but it is also an Iraq that has the potential to eventually tilt the Arab-Muslim world in a different direction.

I’m sure that Obama, whatever he said during the campaign, will play this smart. He has to avoid giving Iraqi leaders the feeling that Bush did — that he’ll wait forever for them to sort out their politics — while also not suggesting that he is leaving tomorrow, so they all start stockpiling weapons.

If he can pull this off, and help that decent Iraq take root, Obama and the Democrats could not only end the Iraq war but salvage something positive from it. Nothing would do more to enhance the Democratic Party’s national security credentials than that.

If he can pull this of?

Let's be very clear, so that even a historical revisionist like Friedman can understand it.

House and Senate Democrats, including President Elect Barack Obama, did everything in their power to lose the Iraq War, and deserve no credit for any success.

How many times in the past two years have Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and their cohorts attempted to defund our troops and force them into defeat? Forty times? Fifty? Frankly, I lost count somewhere in the mid-forties.

Now Friedman and his fellow defeatists on the left who long derided those of us who wanted to secure victory as "28-percenters," "warmongers" and "murderers" want to try to rewrite history. The Times and their fellow travelers long to rewrite their moral cowardice as a virtue, and give themselves a victory by declaration.

That will not be their legacy.

This will.

Friedman should remember this. His newspaper attempted to subsidize defeat, cutting MoveOn.Org a 61% discount to attack our top general during the surge.

A Times photographer took this picture of a Madhi Army militiaman sniping at U.S. soldiers in July of 2006. Impartially, of course.

Democrats including Barack Obama can salvage nothing from Iraq. They were clearly and proudly on the other side, and the resulting allied victory was a defeat for them as it was for al Qaeda, the insurgency, and Iran.

Mumbai Attacks Finally Over, It's Time to Examine Our Own Weaknesses

My friend Jose at Barcepundit has been diligently following the latest on the Mumbai terrorist attacks, which now finally seem to to be winding down. The last terrorists appear to have been killed, and the process of putting out fires and recovering any remaining explosives should start winding down in the next 12-24 hours.

Read it all, as there are some major surprises, including claims that same of the attackers were British, and that a concurrent strike at Mumbai's airport was only thwarted by a missed turn.

I'd also strongly suggest reading Bill Roggio's analysis of the attacks at Long War Journal.

Multiple Terror Attacks Ongoing in Mumbai

The Times of India is reporting multiple terror attacks that have taken place in Mumbai, India this evening. The terrorists appear to be targeting sites popular with Westerners, including luxury hotels, a restaurant, and a train station. Some outlets are claiming that the terrorists were asking specifically where the British and Americans were.

As always, early casualty reports vary wildly and should be taken with a healthy degree of skepticism. That said, the latest figures cited are 80 killed and 250+ wounded, with as many as 40 taken hostage.

The attacks seem crude as far as the weapons and tactics used, with small teams—apparently pairs—using hand grenades and fully-automatic AK-47s, along with at least one significant backpack bomb or similar device that detonated in a taxi, ripping it in half.

As I'm watching this, Fox New television is displaying a still photo of what appears to be security camera footage of a young, clean-shaven man wearing a black tee shirt carrying a folding stock AK with two 30-round magazines taped together to facilitate quick reloading, carrying a blue backpack slung over his shoulder.

The head of India's anti-terrorism squad, Hemant Karkare, is among those killed; it is unclear if he was a target, an unfortunate bystander, or responding to the attacks.

More as this develops.

Update: IBNLive claims that fighting is still on-going at 3 hotels, and that there are seven Westerners among 15 hostages. The attacks apparently began between 10:15-10:30 PM.

A report in Canada's National Post says the group claiming responsibility is the Islamic Security Force-Indian Mujahedeen. They also claimed responsibility for a serial of bombs in Assam that claimed almost 80 lives.

Update: Based upon what we're seeing filter through various media outlets thus far, the sites selected and the coordination of the attacks suggests a well-planned and researched attack, using a minimum number of terrorists per target, using common and relatively inexpensive military small arms.

They seem to be getting maximum effect in terms of disrupting Mumbai and creating carnage and chaos at the outlay of what seems to be less than two dozen total terrorists and the small arms they carried. I have no idea who the Islamic Security Force-Indian Mujahedeen are, but this strike appears to be the work of professionals with military and intelligence skills.

Aim Small, Miss Small

Michael Ledeen notes that a force of 250 insurgents ambushed a column of 30 Marines in Bala Baluk, Afghanistan.

It was a massacre:

"The biggest thing to take from that day is what Marines can accomplish when they're given the opportunity to fight," the sniper said. "A small group of Marines met a numerically superior force and embarrassed them in their own backyard. The insurgents told the townspeople that they were stronger than the Americans, and that day we showed them they were wrong." During the battle, the designated marksman single handedly thwarted a company-sized enemy RPG and machinegun ambush by reportedly killing 20 enemy fighters with his devastatingly accurate precision fire. He selflessly exposed himself time and again to intense enemy fire during a critical point in the eight-hour battle for Shewan in order to kill any enemy combatants who attempted to engage or maneuver on the Marines in the kill zone. What made his actions even more impressive was the fact that he didn't miss any shots, despite the enemies' rounds impacting within a foot of his fighting position. "I was in my own little world," the young corporal said. "I wasn't even aware of a lot of the rounds impacting near my position, because I was concentrating so hard on making sure my rounds were on target." After calling for close-air support, the small group of Marines pushed forward and broke the enemies' spirit as many of them dropped their weapons and fled the battlefield. At the end of the battle, the Marines had reduced an enemy stronghold, killed more than 50 insurgents and wounded several more.

20 shots. 20 kills.

Carlos Hathcock, who famously fought a five-day engagement with a company of Vietcong, would have been proud.

Victory In Iraq Day

The Iraq Wars are over, and we have won.

Let me say that again.

WE HAVE WON THE IRAQ WARS.

And yes, I do mean to use the plural, as we have, along with our allies, won three intertwined wars:

Despite a loathing by the media to declare it such, the Iraq wars are effectively over, and we won. The first war was the second invasion of Iraq where U.S. conventional forces deposed Saddam Hussein, killed his heirs, and defeated his military in 2003. We won that one quickly. The second war, an asymmetrical conflict with al Qaeda in Iraq and other Sunni insurgent groups, emerged from the rubble of the conventional conflict as a media war, where seemingly random IED strikes and vicious terrorist bombings that killed dozens at a time sought to create chaos and defeat the U.S and Iraqi will to win.

I hasten to add that this war was in many ways effective, turning the majority of Americans against the conflict and a President who refused to surrender to terrorism. Despite some serious political and military mistakes, new U.S. counterinsurgency doctrine combined with a Sunni rebellion known as the Awakening Movement to stomp out or co-opt the last significant vestiges of the insurgency. Together as allies, Americans and Iraqis have won this war as well. What remains are isolated terrorists committing regrettable and ultimately pointless attacks of violence that can no longer significantly influence the course of history.

The third war, fought concurrently with the Sunni insurgency, was a proxy war pitting the Shia government and it's coalition backers against EFP-equipped, Iranian-trained Shia militias for the control of Iraq's Shia majority. This was won earlier this year when Iraqi forces commanded by the Prime Minister and backed by American units stormed de facto Iranian strongholds throughout southern Iraq, killing or capturing hundreds of pro-Iranian militiamen and effectively neutering Muqtada al Sadr's Medhi Army.

Like all counterinsurgencies, we couldn't easily see at the time when these foes were effectively finished as a long-term threat, but with the benefit of hindsight and ever-dwindling casualty figures for all sides, it is obvious that the war Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats tried so hard to lose in Congress was won in the sands of al Anbar, the slums of Basra, and the streets of Baghdad.

The Iraq War, as men on the ground on all sides of the conflict will tell you, is over, and we—Americans and Iraqis together— won the right for the Arab world's first democracy to exist despite fierce internal and external opposition.

Because of the nature of insurgencies, our President, the Iraq Prime Minister, and the Generals commanding the coalition military forces will not formally declare the war completed, but there is no longer any violence of violence occurring in Iraq that can be properly be called a war. There hasn't been in months, and the basic conditions for victory—the enemy are dead, vanquished, or turned—have existed since July.

Zombie decided to declare today Victory in Iraq Day. I say, since the conditions are met and they've earned their victory, and should be able to call it by its proper name.

Friendly Fire Coverup Comes to Light

Read this article and watch the 12 minutes of edited video. There is some circumstantial evidence here that two U.S. soldiers in an apparent overwatch position were mistaken for insurgents in Ramadi in 2006, and were then killed by a single shot from the main gun of a U.S Abrams tank. Audio in the clip also seems to indicate that the coaxial 7.62 machine gun on the tank also opened up on the position following the discharge of the main gun.

Friendly fire occurs in every war, even though our soldiers try very hard to minimize the risk.

Here, though, it seems that a coverup began to form within 30 minutes of the incident, before the second soldier who died was even evacuated. As his sergeant blamed the incoming fire on a tank in a radio call, he was immediately told by a superior who was not on the scene that the deaths were the result of enemy mortar fire.

That someone then ordered the rushed shredding all documentation related to the men further reeks of a coverup. I suspect we have some Captains, Majors, and perhaps even a Colonel or higher who are involved.

The Army needs to get to the bottom of this, and fast.

Prepping to Lose Afghanistan

U.S. forces have turned over the majority of the country to Iraq security forces with little recognition by a media obsessed with the cost of Sarah Palin's campaign wardrobe. There are units that had shed their once-required body armor because threats of enemy action are so low. Some frontline units have served their tours thus far without firing a single shot.

Despite a loathing by the media to declare it such, the Iraq wars are effectively over, and we won. The first war was the second invasion of Iraq where U.S. conventional forces deposed Saddam Hussein, killed his heirs, and defeated his military in 2003. We won that one quickly. The second war, an asymmetrical conflict with al Qaeda in Iraq and other Sunni insurgent groups, emerged from the rubble of the conventional conflict as a media war, where seemingly random IED strikes and vicious terrorist bombings that killed dozens at a time sought to create chaos and defeat the U.S and Iraqi will to win.

I hasten to add that this war was in many ways effective, turning the majority of Americans against the conflict and a President who refused to surrender to terrorism. Despite some serious political and military mistakes, new U.S. counterinsurgency doctrine combined with a Sunni rebellion known as the Awakening Movement to stomp out or co-opt the last significant vestiges of the insurgency. Together as allies, Americans and Iraqis have won this war as well. What remains are isolated terrorists committing regrettable and ultimately pointless attacks of violence that can no longer significantly influence the course of history.

The third war, fought concurrently with the Sunni insurgency, was a proxy war pitting the Shia government and it's coalition backers against EFP-equipped, Iranian-trained Shia militias for the control of Iraq's Shia majority. This was won earlier this year when Iraqi forces commanded by the Prime Minister and backed by American units stormed de facto Iranian strongholds throughout southern Iraq, killing or capturing hundreds of pro-Iranian militiamen and effectively neutering Muqtada al Sadr's Medhi Army.

Like all counterinsurgencies, we couldn't easily see at the time when these foes were effectively finished as a long-term threat, but with the benefit of hindsight and ever-dwindling casualty figures for all sides, it is obvious that the war Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats tried so hard to lose in Congress was won in the sands of al Anbar, the slums of Basra, and the streets of Baghdad.

The Iraq War, as men on the ground on all sides of the conflict will tell you, is over, and we—Americans and Iraqis together— won the right for the Arab world's first democracy to exist despite fierce internal and external opposition.

Unable to force a loss in Iraq before taking office and now nearly unable to lose, Barack Obama's allies are already setting their sights on losing the other major conflict engaging our military, attempting to concede Pakistan's tribal areas and Afghanistan to al Qaeda, the Taliban, and other Islamofacist terrorist groups.

Since the beginnings of the buildup that led to the Iraq War, the same far left "war is never the answer (unless we get to build the concentration camps)" set that didn't want us to invade Afghanistan suddenly declared that was the "good" war, that Afghanistan should be our focus, and that getting Osama bin Laden should be the primary, if not singular focus of the entire war on terror.

With Barack Obama now secured as the President Elect, TIME now declares that winning the Af-Pak conflict and getting Osama isn't all that important after all:

The important point of Hayden's Atlantic talk Thursday was that Muslims have turned against bin Laden, realizing that his campaign against the West has ended up killing more Muslims than it has Islam's enemies. Al-Qaeda may be picking up adherents in North Africa and Yemen, preparing its return, but it certainly is no longer in a position to destabilize Saudi Arabia or any other Arab country. And, although Hayden didn't say it, there is no good evidence bin Laden is capable of mounting a large-scale attack. He failed to pull off an October surprise, as many in the FBI and CIA had feared he would.

Despite all this, whether bin Laden is alive or dead is actually pretty irrelevant. Obama has no real choice but to revitalize the search for him, if only for political considerations. If al-Qaeda were to attack in the United States the first months of his term, Obama would end up for the rest of it explaining why he wasn't more vigilant.

But what if bin Laden really is dead, buried under a hundred tons of rock at Tora Bora or so weakened that he might as well be dead? Indefinitely crashing around Afghanistan and Pakistan's wild, mountainous tribal region on a ghost hunt cannot serve our interests. The longer we leave troops in Afghanistan the worse the civil war there will become. One day Obama will need to give up the hunt — declare bin Laden either dead or irrelevant. He has more important enemies to deal with, from Iran to Russia.

I am more than happy to concede that bin Laden is either dead or irrelevant; that is an argument that many on the right and within the military have been making for a very long time. It has been the American left and Democrats in Congress that obsessed with making bin Laden a symbol of the war they argued we should be fighting instead of the war in Iraq. Now that Iraq is won and they have control of both branches of Congress and the White House, they're suddenly attempting to shift the goalposts.

Instead of focusing on winning the war they have been insisting is the "right" war to fight, they're now attempting to trivialize it and minimize expectations of what we can accomplish so that can build the political cover to withdrawal, sans victory. Rest assured... they will find a way to blame President Bush for not winning, instead of accepting responsibility for the loss they are now hard at work trying to engineer.

Certainly, Afghanistan is in far more dire straits than Iraq, but it is a war that can still be won if Democrats decide it is worth committing to win. Sadly, so many of those now in Congress grew up in the 60s and 70s and have a systemic case of Vietnam Syndrome. They don't know how to win. They don't care to win, and in deeply disturbed, self-loathing, and broken parts of their psyche, they don't think we deserve to win wars.

Prepare for defeat, America.

After all, it is the change you elected.

Big Country Checks In

Long-time readers of CY may know "Big Country" from his first-hand reflections of the situation in Iraq as someone who has spent more time in theater than out of it since the war began. He just got back to Baghdad, and shot me the following in an email.

Just touched down 3 +/- hours ago at Sather AB. Dude... INSANELY changed doesn't begin to describe this place. I've landing in Baghdad under fire before and watched random acts of anti-aircraft fire overhead as the locals would try and unsuccessfully utilize old triple a flak guns... I've seen Baghdad under lock and key so to speak throughout 04 and 05. NUTHIN and I do mean NUTHIN can begin to describe the change. Quick observations included the fact that the city was all lit up where it had never been before. Try standing on the runway and not having to worry about random acts of rockets, mortars and suchlike. Try no body armor seen on anyone anywhere since I've been here... This place is so laid back its stupid dude... I'll post more to you and my blog later... but as Yon said "We Won." I'd have to add "In Spades!" to that.

Seems to be a lot of that going around lately.

"The Iraq War is Over. We Won."

Though he'd been on a mission all day and was about to drop, Mike Yon just called from Iraq to let me know that the war is over, and we've won. Whatever it is that is left of violence, there isn't combat. Roughly half of the men in the unit of the 10th Mountain Division he was out on missions with are veterans with previous tours of Iraq and Afghanistan, and in eight months into their deployment in southern Baghdad, they haven't fired a single bullet in combat.

Our soldiers in Iraq have played many roles and worn many hats, but it seems that their primary role now is that of a peacekeeper, providing support to a government and a people that seem increasingly capable of handling their own affairs.

We can declare victory because President Bush wouldn't quit on his troops. If Barack Obama had his way, a triumphant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi would have had a chance to have made the same claim over the Caliphate of Iraq.

Glenn Reynolds has more.

Bad News In The Badlands

Khar, Pakistan:

A homicide bomber attacked a gathering of anti-militant Pakistani tribesmen Thursday, killing nine and wounding 45 in a northwestern region where the military has clashed with insurgents for months, officials said.

The attack in the Batmalai area of the Bajur tribal region was the latest to target tribal militias that have sprung up — with government backing — to take on Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters nested along the Afghan border.

Pakistan launched an offensive in Bajur three months ago to dismantle what it said was a virtual Taliban mini-state that is a source of militants flowing into Afghanistan.

The Salarzai tribesmen were preparing to stage an assault on local militant hide-outs when the blast occurred, said Iqbal Khattak, a government official. Malik Rahimullah, a tribal elder, said the bomb exploded as soon as armed contingents began to move.

He and officials initially said it appeared that a remote-controlled bomb was used, but later Khattak said mutilated body parts of an apparent homicide bomber were found, and that witnesses said they saw a young man rushing into the crowd before the explosion.

Amir Khan, a tribesman, said the scene was littered with severed limbs and that several tribal elders were among the dead.

After failing in their own efforts against the Taliban, al Qaeda, and related groups, the Pakistani military has attempted to spur a tribal rebellion against these groups akin to the "Awakening" movement in Iraq. These efforts will fail.

Period.

The question is whether or not the war in the tribal areas will spread into a civil war, and how secure Pakistan's nuclear warheads will be in the event of such a conflict.

Veterans versus Murtha

It's time for Jack Murtha to apologize to the Marines he smeared. Our veterans deserve nothing less.

Remembering the Fallen

Twenty-five years ago today was the terrorist attack on U.S. Marines in Beirut.

Remember them.

No Awakening in Pakistan

Why an Iraqi-style Awakening movement in Pakistan is destined to fail.

My latest at PJM.

The Road to Hell

Michael Yon's latest dispatchfrom Afghanistan is posted, in which he meets with Afghan fighters, and obtains clues about those fighters that ambushed and killed ten French soldiers in August.

As always, Yon's reporting is reader-funded, so if you like his reporting, please consider contributing.

U.S. Embassy in San'a, Yemen Survives Car Bombing, Assault

Word coming in right now claims that at least one primary blast thought to be a car bomb and numerous smaller blasts thought to be RPGs were detonated near the front gate of the U.S. Embassy compound in San'a, Yemen, and the blasts were followed by gunfire.

Sky News is saying the attackers were dressed as soldiers, and notes that the Yemeni branch of the Islamic Jihad had made threats just three days ago.

Reuters notes that the U.S. Embassy says no Americans were among the wounded.

According to CNN, ten police and civilians were killed, as were six attackers.

Developing...

Will Obama Honor His Commitment to the Af-Pak War? Will We?

As I write this I'm IM-ing Michael Yon on the far side of the world, and the Iraq War's most experienced embedded combat journalist is frustrated with the lack of interest in the Afghanistan-Pakistan War. Yon's Death in the Corn, Part 1 is a riveting story in a war the mainstream media has largely abandoned in order to cover far more pressing issues, such as developing new smears to float against Sarah Palin in a desperate attempt to extend the expiration date of Tina Fey's career on Saturday Night Live.

Yon's current series of combat dispatches from inside C- Company 2 Para of the British Army in Afghanistan's Helmand Province alludes to near constant war with the Taliban, but the reader interest simply doesn't seem to be there.

Ironically, the same media that tried to subvert the war in Iraq with a flood of biased reporting is far more effectively neutering support for the campaign against the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan through negligence and indifference.

Americans will support our soldiers when they can see what they are fighting for. Americans must be able to empathize with our soldiers, and those they would set free. That is the reason Yon's iconic photograph of the Iraq war, of Major Mark Bieger cradling an Iraqi girl named Farah as he rushed to get her aid when she was mortally wounded by an car bomb, mattered so much. It proved that humanizing element. But even as powerful as his photos are, and as compelling as his writing is, Yon cannot carry the coverage of the Af-Pak War on alone.

And the Af-Pak War promises to get far worse before it gets better.

Al Qaeda and the Taliban have been using the tribal regions of Pakistan along the Afghan border as a sanctuary with the blessing and support of the ISI, Pakistan's most powerful intelligence service. President Bush, frustrated by the refusal of the Pakistani government to more actively act as an ally against al Qaeda and the Taliban, secretly authorized cross-border special forces raids, the authorization of which was of course loudly trumpeted in pages of the New York Times.

As a result, an embarrassed Pakistani military was compelled to announce they would fire on U.S. forces if they crossed the border. Allies? Perhaps we never really were, though we certainly liked to pretend that it were so. That illusion now seems to be falling away.

Interestingly, Pakistan's involvement, and the need to take the fight into the tribal regions, may have been one of the things that Barack Obama's army of 300 policy advisers got right, and as Chrstopher Hitchen's notes, may lead a much more involved and bloody war.

Sen. Barack Obama has, if anything, been the more militant of the two presidential candidates in stressing the danger here and the need to act without too much sentiment about our so-called Islamabad ally. He began using this rhetoric when it was much simpler to counterpose the "good" war in Afghanistan with the "bad" one in Iraq. Never mind that now; he is committed in advance to a serious projection of American power into the heartland of our deadliest enemy. And that, I think, is another reason why so many people are reluctant to employ truthful descriptions for the emerging Afghan-Pakistan confrontation: American liberals can't quite face the fact that if their man does win in November, and if he has meant a single serious word he's ever said, it means more war, and more bitter and protracted war at that—not less.

Two-important questions are raised by Hitchens' article.

• Will Republican Presidential candidate John McCain adopt Obama's more muscular approach in dealing with Pakistan's support of the Taliban if elected?
• Will Barack Obama have the mettle for a rare and prolonged break with his base and the Democratic Party he has voted with 96-percent of the time if elected, to fight the war he argues must be fought?

If McCain adopts a more muscular support, his track records suggests that he is willing to shoulder the burden of being unpopular, if it means seeing the war through to victory.

Barack Obama? He's never had to stand on his own before, and I'm not sure he's even tried.

If he is elected, and rises to the challenge of his rhetoric, I suspect he'll be as surprised as the rest of us.

FYI: Yon From Afghanistan Tonight on BlogTalk Radio

Michael Yon, currently embedded with British Paras in a combat outpost in Afghanistan, will be a guest Sunday Sept 14 at 11:00 PM on The JihadiKiller Hour on BlogTalk Radio. Listen if you can.

Yon's next dispatch "Death In the Corn" will be posted at http://www.michaelyon-online.com/ tomorrow.

Jeep Jihadi Gets Up to 33 Years

Progressive university town that Chapel Hill is, they'll probably have some there protest the decision which resulted from Taheri-Azar's attempt to kill UNC-Chapel Hill students in The Pit with a rented SUV.

Shocker: NY Times Decries Laughably Incompetent Taliban Rout As "Complex Attack"

You've got to be kidding me:

The attack on Camp Salerno in Khost Province was one of the most complex attacks seen so far in Afghanistan with multiple suicide bombers and a backup fighting force that tried to breach defenses on to the airport at the base. It followed a suicide car bombing at the outer entrance to the same base on Monday morning, which killed 12 Afghan workers lining up to enter the base, and another attempted bombing that was thwarted shortly after.

The Taliban claimed responsibility for all three attacks in Khost. Their spokesman, Zabiullah Mujahed, reached by telephone at an unknown location, said that 15 suicide bombers, equipped with machine guns and vests packed with explosives, with 30 militants backing them up, attacked the base, one of the largest foreign military bases in Afghanistan. He claimed that some of the bombers had gotten inside the base and had killed a number of American soldiers and destroyed equipment and helicopters. This last claim was denied by General Azimi of the Afghan military.

Suicide bombers mull about while preparing for an attack against a fortified U.S./Afghan position, receive minimal support in the form of small arms cover fire from a small band of untrained militant irregulars before helicopters chop them to bits, and this is what the Times considers a "complex attack?"

No artillery or mortar support.

No mention of any flanking attack or feints.

No mention of even minimal attempts to camouflage the suicide bombers by disguising them as civilians or base workers or members of the opposite sex.

As a matter of fact, they didn't even manage a straight ahead, mindless assault into interlocking fields of fire. They got spotted well outside the perimeter and got cut to shreds while still 1,000 yards outside the base, and the majority of the Taliban seem to have been killed as they tried to flee. Is it even fair to say they were killed in an attack, when it appears they were blown to bits before the attack began?

Not that I'm singling out the Times for crappy coverage of the attack, The Scotsman account sounds like a Monty Python skit:

NATO troops and Taliban fighters clashed today after a group of the insurgents, backed by suicide bombers, tried to breach the defences of the main US base in south-eastern Afghanistan.

Backed by suicide bombers? I guess that is one way of making sure there will be no retreat.

The attack on the French base, by contrast, had far more deadly ramifications, with 10 French soldiers killed and another 21 wounded, but for the Times to try to inflate the importance or the complexity of the Taliban attack on Camp Salerno beyond the buffonish, ill-advised and utter failure that it was isn't simply bad reporting, but verges on making excuses for the other side.

UNC "Jeep Jihadi" Pleads Guilty

Via WRAL:

Mohammed Taheri-azar, the man accused of trying to run over students at UNC-Chapel Hill two years ago, pleaded guilty Tuesday morning to nine counts of attempted first-degree murder.

He will be sentenced later this month.

Taheri-azar was accused of driving a Jeep Cherokee through The Pit, a popular student gathering space on campus, in March 2006.

He was charged with nine counts of attempted murder. At the time of the attack, Taheri-azar told police he wanted to injure people in response to the U.S. government's treatment of Muslims abroad.

This is the Pit, the area where Taheri-azar, a UNC graduate, tried to kill his fellow students. In a March 5, 2007 court appearance he stated he "hates all Americans" and "hates all Jews."

Shockingly, the Iranian-born American citizen didn't hate American enough to leave it.

Summer Camp?

That is what Reuter's says this picture portrays.

The caption reads, "Palestinian youths attend a summer camp organised by the Islamic Jihad movement in Gaza City July 30, 2008."

The Islamic Jihad, of course, is a terrorist group established with the goal of wiping out the Jewish state of Israel and the establishment of an Islamic Palestinian state. Their interests include Qassam rocketry, suicide bombings, and martyr operations.

This isn't a "summer camp" as we would recognize it. This is the modern Hitler Youth.

A Russian "Greenlight" to Attack Iran?

That is one intriguing interpretation of today's disclosure that Iran would be getting the long range Russian surface-to-air missile system known as the S-300PMU-1 (SA-20), and that the system would be deployable in as soon as six months from their expected September arrival.

The Russians no doubt relish the contortions the West is going through over Iran's nuclear program, but at the same time, their intelligence organizations are telling them that Iran is working on developing nuclear weapons and missile technologies that can also threaten Russian interests.

By selling the Iranians advanced weapons systems and then disclosing their most likely deployment dates, the Russians are trying to have their cake and eat it too.

They've outlined the outside window of Iran's greatest vulnerability to an air assault on its nuclear program and command and control facilities. It only remains to be seen now whether or not American and Israeli leaders will strike with enough force to irreparably destroy key elements of the Iranian nuclear program, or if they will make the deadly mistake of trying to avert a nuclear war "on the cheap."

While the Media Slept...

...another province, Diwaniyah, was handed over to Iraqi government control.

This means that for the first time, a democratically-elected Iraqi government is in charge of a majority of the country (10 of 18 provinces). The largest province and former home of the Sunni insurgency, al Anbar, is on the cusp of being handed over as well.

You would think that turning point such as the Iraqis taking over the control of the majority of their country would be a moment that editorial writers, always looking for moments pregnant with symbolism, would gush over.

Alas, Iraq isn't as newsworthy with victory so near at hand (and with the anointed candidate faltering so badly), and so this milestone goes all but unreported.

Framing Obama

Matthew Yglesias wants to get into a framing discussion and attempts to argue than an ABC poll was unfair to his man-crush/candidate.

Without nailing down the dishonesties in Yglesias' attempts to recast McCain's position, let's get into the specifics of what will be lost by Obama's 16-month withdrawal plan.

Logistically, it is deemed quite improbable, verging on impossible, for U.S. combat forces to perform an orderly withdrawal in 16 months. A withdrawal of personnel is possible, but at the cost of leaving behind hundreds of millions (if not billions) of dollars in taxpayer-purchased equipment that would have to be repurchased stateside, increasing future government debt, promising us yet another tax increase courtesy of Obama.

A commenter of his (Allan) claims that "Obama supports removing our troops from Iraq in an orderly process," but that is the height of fantasy; those who work in logistics have noted that his plan would promote chaos and unnecessary stresses on the supply chain and limited port facilities that have to process, decontaminate, pack, and ship outbound equipment and supplies.

This is simply the logistical argument, ignoring the dangers of a too-quick handover in provinces where Iraqi forces are still not deemed capable of taking the lead. Considering the stellar progress and trajectory of security gains and government progress in the last year, it is possible that in 16 months that the Iraqi security forces can take the lead in the eight remaining provinces where the U.S. is in charge of security, but it would be foolish and counterproductive to predetermine the removal of the safety net U.S. forces would still provide as Iraqi forces become more competent and confident.

Unless, of course, you have some vested interest in defeat.

Then there is the simple common-sense matter of which troops Obama wants to remove (combat forces). As a Iraqi war soldier or Marine (I forget which) remarked last week, who's going to be left in Obama's Army in Iraq, cooks and truck drivers?

Who is going to protect our remaining troops and positions and backstop the Iraqis if Obama pulls out our combat troops? Supply clerks? Dental hygienists?

Obama's plans for Iraq, like all of his other plans, are formulated with the impulsiveness and lack of concern for the unintended consequences of international affairs we'd expect from a neophyte government official not even one term removed from an inconsequential and lackluster state government stint, and a responsibility-free community organizer job before it.

Like so many things attached to the name Obama, his withdrawal plan for Iraqi is based upon irresponsible promises divorced from what he can actually deliver without causing far more hurt, a truism of his campign that can just as readily be applied to his domestic and foreign policy perscriptions.

Never Too Late to Spread a Little Fear

You have to give credit where credit is due: the Washington Post isn't quite ready to surrender to victory in Iraq, and they're not above hyping a desperate bid for relevance by waning Shia militias as a significant tactical adaptation.

U.S. Troops in Iraq Face A Powerful New Weapon by Ernesto Londoño of the Washington Post Foreign Service was a much better article the first time I read it over a month ago in Bill Roggio's far more useful Long War Journal article, which the Post mentions but doesn't link. I can only assume that the Post failed to link Roggio's article because is so much more competently written.

While Londoño seems intent on describing a weapon system that is a an improvement over past improvised devices in describing a weapon that has killed at least 21 people, he buries the fact that 18 of those 21 (16 civilians, two Madhi Army militiamen) were killed as a result of the jury-rigged bombs failing, and detonating in their launchers.

The so-called IRAM is a crude, desperate weapon apparently designed by the Judean People's Front.

I'm not surprised that the Post would try to hype potential bad news in Iraq, but a crude weapon that has killed six times more people on the launching end than the receiving end seems more ripe for mocking than fear.

Iraqi Government Considers Timetable for U.S. Withdrawal

They aren't quite ready for coalition forces to leave just yet, but the dramatic gains in terms of security and political successes now have the Iraqi government suggesting a possible U.S. withdrawal.

The Iraqis are confident in their ability to handle their own affairs, and I can certainly understand them wanting Iraq fully back in Iraqi hands. They're hoping for a pull-out in the 2011-13 timeframe and would like to try to establish a deadline based upon "conditions and circumstances" on the ground.

Considering the present situation in Iraq, I certainly think that a pullout in that 3-5 year window is certainly possible, though I can understand why some in Washington may be leery committing to date-based withdrawal schedule, just as I can understand why Iraqis would like to have a specific date to look forward to. As the Iraqi government and coalition forces negotiate, perhaps the best option—and to my mind, the most logical—would be a compromise agreement, that says by X date, Y forces should withdraw if Z conditions have been met, and if not by that date, as soon as those conditions are met.

This would give Iraqis not just a date to look forward to, but give them more incentive to make sure that security and political needs of their citizens are being addressed.

What would be hilarious in watching these developments—if it wasn't so pathetic—are progressive Democrats crowing about this recent decision by Iraqi officials, insisting that a timeline for withdrawal is exactly what they've been asking for all along.

Not so fast.

Some progressives have been pushing for a withdrawal since before the first bomb dropped on Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Some are genuinely opposed to the idea of all wars for any reason, some were opposed to a war launched for reasons they disagreed with by a government they disagreed with, and some fickle souls began pushing for withdrawal only once the conflict became more bloody, expensive, and protracted than they assumed it would be.

However they got to that position, they got there by the worst days of the war in 2006, when Sunni and Shia militias were locked in a deadly sectarian conflict verging on open civil war, and coalition forces were taking heavy casualties. At the time John Murtha, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and other Congressional Democrats were calling the loudest for a timeline for withdrawing American forces in Iraq, the safety and security of the Iraqi people and the success of their nation was the last thing on their minds.

Democrats wanted American troops pulled out of Iraq as soon as logistically possible, without preconditions, even if it plunged that nation into open an civil war that could cost tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent lives, even if such a headlong withdrawal led to genocide, even if such a morally bankrupt decision led to a widespread regional war.

It was and is a craven, reprehensible act of cowardice, mirroring the shameful behavior of the Copperhead Democrats 140 years earlier who wanted to abandon Blacks to slavery in the South to sue for peace in the U.S. Civil War.

The Copperheads of today's Democratic Party color themselves "progressives" for championing the abandonment of a group of people (slightly lighter in skin tone than the last time) to a fate potentially as bad or worse than the slaves of antebellum, and make no mistake: the modern Copperheads care no more about "liberty and justice for all" than did their forebearers.

Then as now, it was about their selfish personal desires, hopes of amassing political power, and disdain for a stubborn Republican President. Then as now, they could rely upon their friends in the media to carry forth a call for appeasement and abandonment.

But the situation now in Iraq is far different now than it was when progressive Democrats began advocating the abandonment Iraqi civilians to a bloody fate.

Now, it is an increasingly competent and confident Iraqi government itself that builds hope of a U.S. withdrawal, based upon their growing strength and the continuing vanquishment of terrorists, criminal militias, and common gangs.

A timeline for withdrawal based upon Iraqi and coalition successes is to be commended as a beacon of hope for a brighter future for a new and sovereign democracy in the Middle East, just as the timeline of abandonment and defeat advocated by progressive Democrats should be regarded by history as a mark of shame.

Update: A bit dog barks.

Homegrown Terrorists Killed Outside U.S. Consulate in Istanbul

Three gunmen ambushed Turkish police outside the U.S. consulate in Instanbul, Turkey today, in an attack that left all three attackers and three Turkish police officers dead, but not before the police killed their assailants.

The attack was carried out with handguns and a pump shotgun, indicating this was not the work of an organized terrorist organization such as al Qaeda or Hezbollah. These groups have a well-documented history of using large vehicle-borne explosives to carry out attacks against fortified positions such as embassies and consulates. Using such short-range weaponry in such a poorly executed and apparently ad hoc assault, the attack had virtually no chance of success, and no one was apparently injured inside the consulate.

A fourth man seen with the three attackers never left a gray car seen at a nearby carwash moments before the ambush, and escaped after his compatriots were killed.

Map Quest

"...a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing."

Such were the famous words of Shakespeare's MacBeth, though they apply equally well to empty Iranian threats against U.S. Naval vessels in the Persian Gulf in case of conflict between our nations.

The simple fact of the matter is that should tensions escalate, U.S. capital ships have no need to be in the Persian Gulf to control the Iranian shoreline and the Straits of Hormuz.

The image above, pulled from Google Maps, shows, small body of water on the left is the Persian Gulf. The large body on the right is the Gulf of Oman, outlet to the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean (larger map).

U.S. carriers, amphibious assault ships, and larger surface ships can easily leave the Persian Gulf via the Straits of Hormuz if a strike on Iran is imminent, far removing them from the range of Iranian surface ships, aircraft, and radar stations. This negates the threat of Iranian anti-ship missiles, and turns the threat of blindly-fired ballistic missiles into irrelevancies splashing down in empty seas.

Iran would retain the ability to strike Israel, and could no doubt stir up trouble in Iraq via it's terror cells there, or even an open but suicidal direct assault against American forces in Iraq and elsewhere on land throughout the Gulf region, but the threats of a Iranian counterstrike against U.S. Naval forces is little more than bluster.

We Must Still be Losing

Tell the Democrats we're running out of people to which we can surrender.

Abu Khalaf (a pseudonym) was the top al Qaeda leader in Mosul, al Qaeda's last reputed stronghold in Iraq, until American soldiers shot him full of holes. Further south, al Sadr's Madhi Army may be falling apart, with perhaps as few as 150 military members.

So, will someone please bring me up to speed on Barack Obama's position this hour? Is he still insisting that it is 2006 in Iraq, that the situation is untenable, and that the best thing we can do is withdraw all our forces in an expensive, resource-abandoning retreat that many experts suspect could trigger a regional war that makes today's gas prices look like a bargain and trigger a worldwide depression?

I ask, because it's rather difficult to keep up with his positions these days as he continues to throw his principles, campaign promises, friends, mentors, and supporters under the proverbial bus to bow at the alter of political expediency.

I kid, of course.

I don't seriously think Obama will change his position on Iraq being lost, as that is the only viable issue of his campaign once you eliminate his Carteresque economic schemes, head-in-the-sand energy policy, his Clintonian heathcare plan, and his beautifully empty platitudes. What he and his allies will try to do is attempt to redefine losing and winning, and try to cast obvious developing successes as defeats. If he can't successfully redefine success into failure, Barack Obama is finished as a viable candidate.

Update: Dr. Krauthammer is equally unimpressed with Obama's constantly shifting positions, and the media's unwillingness to challenge him.

It's an odd relationship Obama has with journalists. He treats them with the arrogant disdain of last night's 2:00 AM hookup, and still they pine over him, happily used, as they're shown the door.

A Sad Day for Copperheads

You won't easily find it on Fox News or CNN or Google News, but somewhere, between the shocking news that Don Imus might have a race-relations problem and the ground-breaking development that Palestinians have engaged in self-defeating random violence, most of us seemed to miss that a dream is more than halfway towards completion.

Al Anbar province in Iraq, once described as all but lost, will become the tenth Iraqi province handed over to Iraqi government control:

The U.S. military will transfer control of security in Anbar Province to Iraqi forces this week, the governor of the region said Monday, a remarkable turnaround given that the region was considered lost to insurgents less than two years ago.

Anbar will be the 10th of 18 provinces in Iraq to return security matters to Iraqi control since the U.S.-led invasion of 2003, but it will be the first Sunni Arab region to do so.

Mamun Sami Rasheed, governor of Anbar Province, said the handover ceremony would take place Saturday. "We have been dreaming of this event since 2003," he said.

With ten provinces down and eight to go, we are passing a milestone of sorts. More than half of the country will be under the control of a democratically-elected Iraqi government, the first freely-elected Arab government in modern history. You would think that Democrats would be thrilled at this step towards freedom, as the turnover also means we are one small step closer to a withdrawal from Iraq, which they claim to be their goal.

Barack Obama isn't trumpeting the good news, however. Left-leaning blogs also appear to be silent on the issue, or nearly so, if Memeorandum is a guide. Instead, liberal bloggers there seem more interested in reacting to Glenn Greenwald's latest long-winded rant about FISA (while ignoring Greenwald's own history of wiretapping, of course).

Al Anbar? It doesn't seem to exist.

With ever passing day that Iraq inches towards success or takes a dramatic leap, it becomes ever more apparent that many Democrats in this country, be they members of the news media, the new media, elected officials, or the activist left, don't just want the United States out of Iraq. They want us cast out or withdrawn in defeat.

The al Anbar handover is symbolic in nature as well as practical, and good news for two Democratic nations. Sadly Democratic leaders cannot join in sharing the good news, because what is good for the United States and what is good for the citizens of Iraq is not good for Harry Reid, or Nancy Pelosi, or Barack Obama.

How sad this day must be for Democrats that are more loyal to their nation than the spite-based political ideology of their fellow travelers.

Update: Peter Wehner, writing at NRO's The Corner, concludes:

Iraq has gone from broken to fragile and slowly mending. Even now, though, leading Democrats seem wholly uninterested in the outcome in Iraq; all they care about is withdrawing American troops. It is a commitment they hold with ideological and theological intensity – and if they are ever allowed to act on their convictions, misery and death and defeat would follow.

The Real "Dead-Enders"

It has been fascinating—and often more than a little infuriating—to watch the anti-Administration wing of the anti-war movement over the past year.

I'd like to first make that distinction clear: there are those who are against the concept of warfare to resolve conflicts, and those that are against this war in specific because they have an acute loathing for their domestic political opposition, led by the current President. Make no mistake: so many of those who presently claim to be anti-war now would change their position on military intervention in an heartbeat if it meant intervening in Darfur or (_fill_in_the_blank_), if it satisfied their political desires and could be painted as a "humanitarian" mission.

Those politically-motivated progressives that see anti-war sentiment as little more than a way to grab power via the ballot box have been most aggravating and occasionally amusing. They saw that an unpopular and protracted war was a way to market themselves to pick up seats in Congress in 2004 and 2006, and hoped perhaps they could ride anti-war sentiment to the White House in 2008.

They rallied behind an eloquent dove of a candidate who has repeatedly promised America to withdrawal U.S. forces on a rigid 16-month timetable, regardless of condition on the ground or the effect it would have on the Iraqi people or on the stability of the region.

That timetable was predicated upon conditions on the ground in Iraq in 2006, when violence was spiraling out of control, and it seemed all but assured that Iraq would become a failed state. Obviously, a lot has changed in the time since Barack Obama predicated his campaign on achieving defeat, and in the past year in particular.

Violence dropped as U.S. and Iraqi forces moved off-base and into the communities, and as the communities themselves began rejecting insurgents, terrorists, gangs, and rogue militias. The Iraqi Parliament, once almost as ineffective as our current Congress, has passed important reconciliation legislation, including an amnesty law that has already led to hundreds of captured insurgents, including Associated Press personnel, to be set free.

Though leading Democrats like Harry Reid still insist that the war is lost, and the Speaker of the House insists that any progress must be due to Iran's moderating influence (and not the success of American and Iraqi forces in killing those carrying out those "moderating Iranian influences") it has become obvious to most of the world that the Iraqi experiment just might work and is well worth pursuing.

Austin Bay noted this morning that freshman Senator Hopeandchange may be trying to distance himself from his adopted policy of purposeful defeat (h/t: Instapundit):

Obama still touts his pull-out — sort of, occasionally, okay, less occasionally. Obama, like his cohort of supporters, is politically committed to defeat. Obama will now rely on rhetoric to assauge the DailyKos-crowd and obscure his shift on Iraq. He will change his position– and Samantha Power prepared the way several months ago in her ill-fated BBC interview this past spring. Obama thinks he can get away with it: he just backed out of public financing.

The NY Times on the deal before the vote. And Fox.

The real rubes in this election won’t be the rural Midwesterners Obama slandered, the ones who cling to their guns and religon. It will be the gray-haired profs with ponytails, clinging to their cannabis and liturgy of defeat.

When Obama quietly slinks aways from his signature issue and the anti-Bush wing of the anti-war movement loses their defeat-at-any-cost pledgemaster, what will become of the anti-war progressive fringe?

An Army Learns

Over at The Donovan, proof that this generation of military leaders is learning from mistakes made in the past.

al Sadr Crafting an Iraqi Hezbollah?

Via email from a trusted source, a VOI account. It looks like al Sadr is going to continue his Iranian-backed insurrection against the Iraqi government:

The anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr on Friday expressed intention to authorize setting up "cells to resist the occupation", head of the political bureau of Sadr's Movement said.

"The declaration by Sayyed Muqtada al-Sadr to form cells to resist the
occupation comes in full conformity with the approach of the
Sadrists," Sheikh Liwa Semaysam told Aswat al-Iraq- Voices of Iraq-
(VOI) on the phone.

The key Sadrist leader added that these cells will "have a written
authorization by Sayyed Muqtada al-Sadr to carry out their task, on
the condition that arms will only be in their hands for use against
the occupier and none else."

Sheikh Semaysam, a close aide of Sadr, provided no further details.

If true—and apparently, it is—al Sadr is attempting to split and sanction a military wing off of the Madhi Army and Iranian "Special groups" to continue insurgent operations, while making at least a face-value attempt to demilitarize the organization.

Intresting, isn't it?

Iran tried to infiltrate Iraqi government at all levels, along with militia groups and criminal gangs. Obviously, as PM Maliki's clearing out of Sadrists from Baghdad to Basra proved, the government route has failed, and the militia route is on the ropes.

As a result, al Sadr is apparently attempting to craft an Iraqi Hezbollah, entrenching his group socially as an Iranian-supported shadow government with it's own insurgent military wing. Iraq's security forces and government are far less fractured than those in Lebanon, so it seems unlikely that al Sadr's hopes will come to fruition, but the development does raise an interesting question, namely: is this the best Iran has left?

What Lies Will He Tell Today?

Over at Hot Air this morning, Ed Morrissey points to an article in the Weekly Standard about Barack Obama's opposition to the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment designating Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) a terrorist organization:

These designations are more than just rhetorical; labeling the IRGC as a terrorist organization brings to bear a range of powerful sanctions that crack down on its ability to work in the global financial system.

The proximate cause of the Kyl-Lieberman amendment was a growing dossier of evidence from General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker, documenting the IRGC's role in financing, training, arming, and directing extremists in Iraq responsible for the murder of hundreds of American and Iraqi soldiers and civilians.

Of course, that's not the full extent of the IRGC's malign influence. The group is an acknowledged supporter of terror (a fact even Senator Obama concedes), training, financing and arming Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and most recently, the Taliban. At home in Iran, the IRGC now dominates the regime, with 9 out of 21 seats in the Ahmadinejad cabinet held by former IRGC and IRGC-affiliated officials. The IRGC is also a vital player in Iran's licit and illicit economies, and dominates important sectors like construction.

Needless to say, the Kyl-Lieberman amendment won broad support in the Senate, passing 76-22. Senator Hillary Clinton voted for it, as did Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senator Chuck Schumer, and Senator Dick Durbin.

Senator Obama, however, was one of a handful of senators who opposed the amendment--which had aroused the ire of the left-wing blogosphere. In the frenzied minds of DailyKos and Moveon.org, Kyl-Lieberman--or "Lieberman-Kyl," as they preferred to call it--was nothing less than a stealth declaration of war on Iran.

So if the National Journal's Most Liberal Senator is still taking marching orders from Kossacks and the "General Betray Us" radicals of Moveon.org, where, precisely, is Obama's claimed but never seen bipartisanship? It doesn't exist. It never has.

As Ed astutely notes:

There are only two reasons to oppose the application of sanctions on Iran. Either one wants to go to war and skip all of the other options, or doesn't believe Iran to be a threat and a sponsor of terror. Into which group should we put Barack Obama?

Obama, who resolutely refuses to acknowledge changing fortunes in Iraq (the more than year-long string of successes there are not changes he can believe in), obviously takes the later, "see no evil" view.

Pro-Palestinian Obama will try to gloss over his record (such as the Kyl-Lieberman vote) and his past associations today as he addresses AIPAC. Perhaps someone in the audience will ask Obama why he allowed a pair of grants totaling $75,000 to go to the Arab-American Action Network, a group that calls the establishment of Israel as a "catastrophe," while director of the ultra-liberal Woods Fund.

Barack Obama supports Israel the way R. Kelly supports Girl Scouts. It's time someone calls him on it.

Yon: War Could be Over By Year's End

A stunning prediction from Michael Yon:

One of the biggest problems with the Iraq War is that politics has frequently triumphed over truth. For instance, we went into Iraq with shoddy intelligence (at best), no reconstruction plan, and perhaps half as many troops as were required. We refused to admit that an insurgency was growing, until the country collapsed into anarchy and civil war. Now the truth is that Iraq is showing real progress on many fronts: Al Qaeda is being defeated and violence is down and continuing to decrease. As a result, the militias have lost their reason for existence and are getting beaten back or co-opted. Shia, Sunni and Kurds are coming together -- although with various stresses -- under the national government. If progress continues at this rate, it is very possible that before 2008 is out, we can finally say "the war has ended."

This comes as part of Yon's offer to tour Iraq with U.S. Senators—including the Presidential candidates—so that they can make informed decisions regarding the progress of the conflict.

If Yon is accurate, then Democrats (including Barack Obama) who continue to insist that the war is lost are going to lose all of their credibility in coming months. They will of course try to pivot, and make up some excuse to take credit for the success of operations in Iraq if such a situation develops.

History will not remember pro-defeat politicians or activists kindly.

Marine Removed From Duty For Proselytizing in Fallujah

From Multi-National Force – West PAO, via email:

CAMP FALLUJAH, Iraq – A Coalition force service member was removed from his duties today amid concerns from Fallujah's citizens regarding reports of inappropriate conduct.

Multi-National Force - West initiated an investigation into reports that a coin with a Bible verse written in Arabic was distributed to Iraqi citizens as they passed through a Fallujah entry control point. If the allegation is substantiated, appropriate action will be taken.

"Regulations prohibit members of the coalition force from proselytizing any religion, faith or practices," said Col. Bill Buckner, MNC-I spokesman, "and our troops are trained on those guidelines before they deploy."

"This has our full attention," said Col. James L. Welsh, chief of staff, Multi-National Force - West. "We deeply value our relationship with the local citizens and share their concerns over this serious incident."

This was reported earlier today by McClatchy, but quite frankly, when a news organization runs items under the tagline "truth to power," by an author also published by al Jazeera, I like to get confirmation first. I've got a request in for more details on this, and will update again if they have additional information.

Pelosi: Surge Failed, Iran Rules Iraq

The special kind of delusion it takes to believe that Iraq was irretrievably lost in 2006 is still alive and well and in positions of leadership in the Democratic Party.

Speaking with the San Francisco Chronicle, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi insisted that the surge failed, and insists that if there is any progress, it is because Iran allowed it.

Well, the purpose of the surge was to provide a secure space, a time for the political change to occur to accomplish the reconciliation. That didn't happen. Whatever the military success, and progress that may have been made, the surge didn't accomplish its goal. And some of the success of the surge is that the goodwill of the Iranians-they decided in Basra when the fighting would end, they negotiated that cessation of hostilities-the Iranians.

Cue the flaming skull.

Pelosi's needful delusions means that dictator-loving, Jew-hating 9/11 conspiracy-theorist Cindy Sheehan is not the most insane candidate vying for California's Eight District House seat.

Moon: Operative Word in Iraq is "Hope." Obama: Let's Change That.

Despite their best intentions and willing accomplices in some press outlets, Democrats have apparently been unable to convince the international community that time stopped in Iraq in 2006.

"Notable progress" has been made in Iraq despite persistent problems, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Thursday at an international summit to promote peace in the violence-wracked country.

"If we were asked to use just one word to describe the situation in Iraq today, I would choose the word 'hope,'" Ban said at the Stockholm, Sweden, conference. "Iraq is stepping back from the abyss that we feared most."

Barack Obama, of course, refuses to see any signs of progress in Iraq as a matter of policy and self-interest. His campaign is wedded to the leftmost fringe of the Democratic Party, who insist that failure is the only acceptable opinion in Iraq. The freshman senator from Illinois still publicly advocates headlong retreat from Iraq within 16 months of taking office if elected, and will not be swayed by stark warnings from international experts and regional governments that such a retreat would reverse all the gains paid for by coalition casualties, and perhaps trigger events as severe as a regional war that would impact energy markets and economies globally.

Right now, the greatest threat to Iraq's future isn't Iran, militants, or sectarian divides, but an inexperienced defeatist from Chicago.

Just the Facts, Sam

Would someone please provide ABC News' Sam Donaldson with some facts?

It is perhaps progress in this commentary piece for a journalist to admit that Obama needs schooling— I do find it amusing that he refers to McCain as "the professor" and Obama as "his callow student"—but he grossly overestimates the size of al Sadr's faltering organization by an enormous amount, while downplaying Madhi Army defeats at the hands of the Iraqi security forces in recent weeks.

Iraq will almost certainly be one of the central issues in November -- if McCain is lucky it will remain relatively calm with casualties relatively low. But there is a wildcard named Moqtada al-Sadr, the 34-year-old Shiite leader of a 2 million man army.

When the surge began, al-Sadr instructed his army to lie low. Why fight an increased American force? But we all saw what happened a few weeks ago when al-Sadr loosed his men in Bashra and Bagdad -- violence flared, casualties spiked -- before calling another truce.

I'd like for Mr. Donaldson to explain where he got a figure of 2 million for the collection of neighborhood militias, street gangs, and "special groups" that make up the JAM (Jaish al Mahdi). Most estimates of the group have not put numbers larger than roughly 60,000 strong at any point in the conflict, and present numbers are said to be in rapid decline even now because of their growing unpopularity among Iraqi Shia.

I'd also like Donaldson to justify his dishonest portrayal of events in Basra and Baghdad. In both cities the Madhi Army suffered horrific losses at the hands of Iraqi security forces before suing for peace out of a sense of self preservation, and in both cities, Iraqi soldiers and police continued to relentlessly push into neighborhoods formerly dominated by Madhi Army thugs event after these "treaties" were agreed upon. In Basra, Iraqi government forces now rule virtually uncontested as they continue to carry out targeted strikes against wanted members of the Madhi Army. GoI security forces entered Sadr City with an unexpectedly large number of soldiers equipped with heavy armor, surprising the militiamen, who have yet to formulate a response.

Donaldson is obviously as much an Obama cheerleader as he is a journalist, but his 37-years in the business don't give him the right to make up his own reality.

Stick the facts, Sam. One Dan Rather at a time is enough.

Always Back a Winner

If the Iraq War is "lost" as journalists, politicians, and other Democrats continue to shrilly insist, then why is the Iraqi military choosing American weapons?

It isn't because American M16s are better than AK-47s for the needs of the Iraqi military (they aren't), but because Iraqis are impressed by American soldiers and want to emulate them.

Do you think they would be so eager to adapt our gear if we were losing?

Me neither.

Hairballs and Hellfires

In what I think is a fairly well-balanced article about the significant increase in the use of U.S. Hellfire missiles during the recent campaign against Shiite militiamen in Baghdad's Sadr City came this utterly bizarre claim:

One of Zahara's uncles, Dhia Rahi Shaie al-Koreishi, 34, a taxi driver, and her grandmother, Um Fadhil al-Koreishi, were killed by the blast.

"The heart of this family has been ripped out," said Alaa Rahi Shaie, 29, another uncle, who was stoic in describing the death of his brother. "This is his blood," he said, indicating red splotches in front of his home. "And the remains of his head are over there."

He pointed at a large mound of dirt. A group of young boys dug out the remains and then showed visitors a black bag filled with clumps of hair and scalp.

Family members and neighbors said they didn't see anyone in the area fire rockets. Two black funeral banners hung outside the battered home to honor the dead.

I'm sure some of my readers are more familiar with Muslim burial rites than I (just about anyone would be), but I've always been under the impression that Muslims were very careful to respect the dead and bury them as intact as possible shortly after their demise. Banners honoring the dead are nice. Not treating their remains like kabob scraps is nicer.

Does the claim here of the remains of Dhia Rahi Shaie al-Koreishi's head being unceremoniously dumped in a sack and buried by the family in a dirt pile where children perform ad-hoc exhumations strike anyone else as being odd, even for what we've heard of Iraq?

As for the apparent premise of the article that AGM-114M Hellfire II missiles take an inordinate number of civilian lives... well, I'm not sure what to tell you.

Hellfires are preferred for being one of the most accurate missiles currently deployed, and it has the added benefit of having a smallish explosive warhead, making it somewhat less dangerous than some other weapons systems that we could deploy.

The Post does not make any attempt to distinguish how many of the 251 Iraqis killed by Hellfire missiles were Shiite militiamen, Iranian-trained " Special Groups" operatives, and how many were real non-combatant civilians.

While the Post article was less than clear on this point, it seemed possible that Uncle brains-in-a-bag could have been one of the two men loading rockets into a vehicle who were watched for hours before being killed, and grandma might have simply had the misfortune of having her son followed home by a missile. Or they could have been innocent bystanders... we simply don't know.

We do know that the video accompanying the article shows several strikes on obviously armed fighters (including a large group caught red-handed firing rockets), with no obvious civilians nearby. Still, in urban combat civilians will always run the risk of being casualties, and we are making attempts to minimize that possibility now through tactical decisions made, and in the future via new weapons systems. The 5.3 lbs Spike missile, at just over two-feet long will hopefully provide just as much precision with less collateral fragmentation than the Hellfire in future urban conflicts.

Even then, the best advice for civilian in urban conflict areas is simple: don't stand to close militiamen and terrorists.

Welcome to the Show!

Yochi J. Dreazen posts an article titled U.S. Delays Report on Iran Arms in the Wall Street Journal, May 21:

The U.S. military, in a shift, has postponed the release of a report detailing allegations of Iranian support for Iraqi insurgents, according to people familiar with the matter.

The military had initially planned to publicize the report several weeks ago but instead turned the dossier over to the Iraqi government, these people said. The Iraqis are using the information to pressure Tehran to curb the flow of Iranian weaponry and explosives into Iraq, these people said.

Me, writing here at Confederate Yankee on May 8 in a post titled Why You Won't See the Iranian Weapons We've Captured in Iraq:

...hopes of a diplomatic solution between Iran and Iraq have forestalled the U.S. military press conference displaying captured weaponry first expected in Baghdad over a week ago.

The press conference was delayed in hopes that an Iraqi delegation to Tehran bearing evidence of Iranian weapons captured by U.S. and Iraqi forces in recent fighting could resolve the issue as a matter between the two neighboring states.

Unsurprisingly, Iran has disputed the evidence, and as a result, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has ordered a special committee to compile evidence captured by both American and Iraqi forces. Once the evidence is compiled, it is hoped that this would help inform the committee in putting forth a coherent Iraqi policy on Iranian involvement in smuggling weapons into Iraq. That policy will be presented to the Iranian government in hopes of stopping Iranian smuggling of weapons and preclude a conflict between the two nations, according to U.S. military sources. Iran and Iraq fought a war from 1980-88 that claimed approximately one million lives when Saddam Hussein ruled Iraq, and the political goals of neither Shia-dominated government would be well-served by a return to conflict.

Perhaps by June, the media will also come to my conclusion on what this means to Iranq/Iran relations, as well.

It is getting harder and harder for the media to keep up with the turn of events in Iraq. Many had been wedded to the "quagmire" theory of assumed stasis leading to assured defeat and withdrawal, a theory still coveted by most senior Democrats and the online activist left. They bitterly cling to this theory because of the amount of political capital they have invested in it, even though that theory is being directly countered by evidence mounting at a blistering pace.

Iraq is not free from terror or outside influence and will not be for years to come, but the facts are that the insurgent groups, terrorist organizations, and rogue militias in Iraq are collapsing before the onslaught of increasingly fierce and competent Iraqi security forces, civilian-provided intelligence, and gutsy civilian leadership, backed by U.S. forces. We'll leave it for the historians to decide at which point the corner was turned and victory was assured, but some things are certain.

Anyone still attempting to claim that coalition and Iraqi forces are fighting in a lost cause or a endless quagmire as of mid-May, 2008, is doing so in direct opposition to the facts on the ground.

Your only response should be wondering what they are trying to sell you, and why.

Bush to Attack Iran Before Leaving Office

So says the Jerusalem Post, citing Army Radio, citing an anonymous Israeli government official, citing someone he says is "a senior member of the president's entourage."

Why, it's just like hearing it from Bush directly!

Responsible journalists don't run stories this poorly sourced as a rule, but exceptions are almost always made when the stories are sensational enough, and the story is something that journalists, editors, and many readers want to believe. That is why variations of this story of an impending attack on Iran have been recurring for the past couple of years, and no doubt will continue until President Bush leaves 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, at which point the same rumors will be passed down to (hopefully) President McCain.

The story repeats because elements of it ring true enough for those convinced that a military strike against against the world's foremost sponsor of terrorism and arms used to kill American soldiers since 1983 is an act of a fascist dictatorship, and also for those that have the good sense to recognize that reducing the capabilities of a rogue nuclear and asymmetrical warfare threat promising genocide as a matter of state policy is a common sense act of survival for the greater good of man.

It is quite possible that certain events before January of 2009 could trigger preemptive strikes upon Iran by the present Administration, Israel, or perhaps even both nations acting in concert. I rather doubt such rumor-mongering helps anyone, however, beyond creating full employment in Palestinian phone banks calling on behalf of the pacifist candidate Obama.

Totten On Yon

I don't think they could possibly find someone more qualified to review Michael Yon's Moment of Truth in Iraq than Michael Totten, another independent journalist who has spent and extensive amount of time in the Middle East, including Iraq.

Read Totten's review The Real Iraq, and if you haven't yet read Yon's book, or would like to donate copies to your local library so that other people can, click the image above to order from Amazon.com.

I'd note that both Yon and Totten are independent journalists, and traveling to and through combat zones to bring you stories the media won't tell is both expensive and dangerous, so please consider contributing at their sites, Michael Totten, and Michael Yon.

The Bloodless Bullets of Baghdad

I suspect that this is less a case of "fauxtography" than a curious physiological response, but Associated Press cameraman Karim Kadim captured this photo of a Sadr City woman having a bullet removed from her forearm.

Here is an enlarged and cropped version of the photo as tweaked in PhotoShop to focus on the wound. I got as close as I could without distorting the image significantly.

As you can see, the bullet is being pulled nose first, suggesting that it penetrated though the outside of the woman's arm and passed through the interosseous membrane between the ulna and radius to stop at some point on the inside part of her forearm.

All combat rifle cartridges commonly used should have fully penetrated this woman's arm completely with a significant (and ghastly) exit wound if not impeded by either hitting a barrier of some sort, or coming from an extreme distance away. I'd love to see a higher resolution version of this photo to see if we could determine what kind of rifle cartridge this was.

Whatever the bullet is, I'm pretty sure it isn't one of these.

5/20 Update: After speaking with Associated Press resources in New York, trauma surgeons, and other resources in Iraq, this photo is confirmed as the extraction of a bullet that hit the woman in the photo after being fired from a considerable distance, and after the bullet had expended much of its energy. Additional still footage is said to exist showing the entry wound, and there is also said to be videotape of the extraction.

This was not a staged photo, just a strange physiological response to an uncommon wound.

Hussayn's Story

Despite feigned ignorance of the facts, the media knows that Muqtada's militias are being crushed, that al-Masri's terrorists are being picked off, and Iraqi's of all sects, Sunni Shia and Kurd, have newfound trust in a newly-muscular Iraqi government and military.

Iraq's want peace, are are willing to destroy the belligerents among themselves if it leads to a prosperous future. Here is one Iraqi's story.

More, please.

Gripes of Wrath

Liberal bloggers and journalists put their inability to focus on substantive issues on display yesterday along with a blind hatred for President Bush, thanks to a catalytic interview yesterday by Mike Allen of The Politico and Yahoo News.

The interview was entitled "Bush warns of Iraq disaster," and in it, President Bush warned of the regional consequences of the kind of a premature, headlong retreat from Iraq. Such a retreat is favored by Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama, who has pledged to withdraw American forces in 16 months.

Such a withdrawal window is not logistically feasible without abandoning costly American military equipment and supplies, and the cost of destabilizing Iraq's security is feared as a threat by every country in the region, and cannot be overemphasized.

Iraqis fear a return to sectarian conflict that may rapidly escalate into the genocide of hundred of thousands and the displacement of millions if their nation collapses due to a too-quick, timetable-based American withdrawal such as the one Obama has repeatedly promised.

Turkey fears an attempt by Iraqi Kurds to form their own country in the wake of a U.S. retreat, and would invade northern Iraq (they are already making multi-day raids, along with air and artillery strikes). Jordan, saturated with refugees only just returning to Iraq in past months due to the success of the surge, would face a new flood of Iraq refugees that would threaten the nation's economy and national security. Syria would face similar mass immigration problems, compounded by possible Turkish incursions to root out Kurdish rebels in northeastern Syria.

Saudi Arabia and Iran, already sharing sharp words over Hezbollah's actions in Lebanon, will engage in a proxy war in Iraq that many expect may erupt into an open regional war.

Such a conflict would shut down Persian Gulf shipping and drive the price of oil astronomically high (how would you like $10/gallon gasoline, or higher?), impacting financial markets worldwide, negatively impacting billions of people, with those in developing nations hardest hit.

In short, the headlong retreat promised by Barack Obama will plunge the Middle East into conflict and wreck economies worldwide, including our own. It would be, in every sense, the disaster President Bush mention in his interview.

How did liberal members of the media and bloggers react to the interview? They ignored a direct policy conflict of global importance between a sitting U.S. President and his would-be successor, in order to write grade school-level snark.

I expect very little from the media. I see they delivered.

Corners Turned

Moqtada al-Sadr, the figurehead leader of the Mahdi Army that fled to Tehran long ago, has lost Basra. It must have been heartbreaking for the New York Times to make the admission that the Iraqi Army and Police had pounded Iranian-back Shia militias and criminal gangs into submission, but give them credit; they did report it.

Iraqi and American forces continue to pound gangs and Iranian-trained and equipped "Special Groups" in the massive Baghdad slum called Sadr City. Fighting continues despite al-Sadr's impotent call for a truce, and an "anaconda strategy" of squeezing out combatants while choking off of their resupply lines continued, as a wall slicing off the southern end of the slum reached 80% completion.

In Mosul, an Iraqi-led, American-backed assault on Mosul, al Qaeda's last urban stronghold in Iraq, has begun, targeting the last significant bastions of al Qaeda and aligned insurgents in Iraq after the success of the "surge" in the Baghdad region and the Sunni civilian uprising against al Qaeda in Al Anbar over the past year.

The war in Iraq is not over, but no serious person can argue that Iraqi government forces and the coalition military forces backing them are not now dictating the terms and tempo of the conflict in Iraq. They and are imposing their will with considerable success upon areas deemed as unapproachable and lost as recently as weeks and months ago, and have won the support of the overwhelming majority of an Iraqi people tired of war and extremist ideologies.

And yet...

We still have an entire political party predicating their future success on a U.S. and Iraqi government defeat in Iraq. They abhor American soldiers with a spittle-flecked passion, find them to be thugs and criminals of the highest order, and deep down in their heart of hearts, think that American solders would torture innocent civilians and kill merely for sport, if only the watchful eyes of the media were no there to keep them in check.

They view a certain rising American politician as their only salvation in a regional conflict that vexes their very souls. They see his promises of "hope" and "change" and unconditional dialog with Nasrallah or Ahmadinejad and other regional leaders as a gateway to the kind of world they want to live in. They fear John McCain will prove to be a second George Bush.

But enough about the Iranian mullacracy.

I'm just glad we don't have Americans that act this way.

As If There Was Ever Any Doubt...

...that anti-war protesters targeting a Marine recruiting station in Berkley California are losers.

Members of the women's group began bringing placards and pink banners to the center Friday, where they are expected to rally later in the morning, armed with spells and pointy hats for a "Witches, clowns and sirens day."

"Women are coming to cast spells and do rituals and to impart wisdom to figure out how we're going to end war," Zanne Sam Joi of Bay Area Code Pink told FOXNews.com.

The group's Mother's Day week of themed protests, which included days to galvanize grannies and bring-your-daughter-to-protest, appears to have done little to boost its flagging numbers.

All those drugs taken in '68 really had an effect, didn't they?

Why You Won't See the Iranian Weapons We've Captured in Iraq

Starting over a year ago with the discovery of a new kind of roadside bomb—EFPs or explosively-formed projectiles—American commanders in Iraq began believing that Iran was supplying weapons to militants in Iraq. That belief grew as more munitions were captured, including 34 unfired rockets captured on July 12, 2007 that were said to be of Iranian origin.

In recent weeks American forces have claimed to have captured even more Iranian weapons, including those that were new, apparently manufactured in 2008. In addition, Iraqi government forces are said to have captured a significant number of weapons of suspected Iranian manufacture during military options in and around Basra over the past month. On top of the weaponry captured, recently-released information claims that Shiite militiamen were trained by Hezbollah in Iranian terrorist camps near Tehran, and that some of those militants have been captured, and have resided in U.S. military custody for several months providing valuable intelligence.

But if solid physical evidence of Iranian military interference has been captured, then why hasn't that evidence been presented to independent experts for verification? Why hasn't that material been presented to a skeptical world media, still unwilling to believe governmental claims at face value after Saddam Hussein's WMDs turned out to be ghosts?

The answer is both simple and pragmatic: hopes of a diplomatic solution between Iran and Iraq have forestalled the U.S. military press conference displaying captured weaponry first expected in Baghdad over a week ago.

The press conference was delayed in hopes that an Iraqi delegation to Tehran bearing evidence of Iranian weapons captured by U.S. and Iraqi forces in recent fighting could resolve the issue as a matter between the two neighboring states.

Unsurprisingly, Iran has disputed the evidence, and as a result, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has ordered a special committee to compile evidence captured by both American and Iraqi forces. Once the evidence is compiled, it is hoped that this would help inform the committee in putting forth a coherent Iraqi policy on Iranian involvement in smuggling weapons into Iraq. That policy will be presented to the Iranian government in hopes of stopping Iranian smuggling of weapons and preclude a conflict between the two nations, according to U.S. military sources. Iran and Iraq fought a war from 1980-88 that claimed approximately one million lives when Saddam Hussein ruled Iraq, and the political goals of neither Shia-dominated government would be well-served by a return to conflict.

Iraqi foreign minister Hoshiyar Zebari is urging Iran and the United States to rejoin stalled security talks after U.S. officials described negotiating with Iran "meaningless" without Iran stopping military interference in Iraq, and Tehran accusing the U.S. of "massacring" Iraqis as operations in Baghdad's Sadr City against Shia militias continue. The resumation of talks is presently deemed unlikely, but if the Iraqi committee completes its mission and determines that Iran has in fact been supplying training and weaponry to Shia militias presently fighting against the Iraqi military forces, the Iraqis will have a diplomatic weapon to use against Tehran that may force the Iranian government to stop its suspected supply of weaponry into Iraq, and it's training of Shia militiamen by Hezbollah terrorists and Iran's military.

The diplomatic pressure the Iraqi commission could bring to bear with it's findings could deepen divides in Iran's government between moderates and hardliners. Moderate former President Mohammad Khatami has recently made statements that some are interpreting as an admission that the current hardline regime as supplying weaponry and training to militants in Iraq and elsewhere.

Iran's weapons may be taking the lives of American and Iraqi troops in Iraq right now, but with the Iraqi government's creation of a committee to build an official Iraqi policy position on Iran's interference, Iran's weapons may turn out to be a greater diplomatic weapon for Iraq.

New Iranian Weapons Captured in Iraq

Iranian 107mm rockets recovered after attack on U.S. FOB Hammer in Iraq, July 2007

Playing a very dangerous game:

The U.S. military says it has found caches of newly made Iranian weapons in Iraq, leading senior officials to conclude Tehran is continuing to funnel armaments into Iraq despite its pledges to the contrary.

Officials in Washington and Baghdad said the purported Iranian mortars, rockets and explosives had date stamps indicating they were manufactured in the past two months. The U.S. plans to publicize the weapons caches in coming days. A pair of senior commanders said a presentation was tentatively planned for Monday.

The allegations, which couldn't be independently verified, mark a further hardening of U.S. rhetoric on Iran, which senior American officials now describe as the greatest long-term threat to Iraq.

This month, Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Iranian support for Shiite extremist groups had grown. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said for the first time that he believed Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad knew about the shipments.

Iran has long denied that its government knowingly funneled weapons into Iraq or trained Shiite militants there. It has derided the U.S. claims as propaganda. Several senior U.S. military officials said the weapons caches would undercut the Iranian denials and provide new evidence of continuing Iranian support for Shiite militants across Iraq.

"You can see the manufacturing dates right on the armaments themselves," one senior commander in Baghdad said. "These are very clearly weapons that were made in the last month or so."

Markings, of course, are easy to fake, and the truther fringe of the "Bush lied, people died!" sect are sure to accuse the Administration and/or elements of the military with doing just that. Much harder to fake, however, are the materials used, certain tool marks, and other mechanical and electrical components. Taken together, the component pieces form a unique signature that EOD experts can read like a fingerprint. As far as our military is concerned, the markings only serve to confirm what explosive experts could already tell from even unmarked weapons.

This is a stupid mistake by Ahmadinejad and the Iranian regime, coming at a time when Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is celebrating stunning military successes in Basra and other parts of the Shia south against Iranian-backed "special groups" within Muqtada al-Sadr's Madhi Army militia. The recovery of this cache can only help Iraq's central government grow even more cohesive, upsetting hopes for a failed Iraqi state and U.S. defeat.

Iran's foreign policy is turning out to have been very poorly calculated as of late. One can only wonder what their next gaffe will be, and what affect it may have on the hardline regime in Tehran.

How Many Military Suicides?

The San Francisco Chronicle posts this without question:

More than 120 veterans of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq commit suicide every week while the government stalls in granting returning troops the mental health treatment and benefits to which they are entitled, veterans advocates told a federal judge Monday in San Francisco.

The rights of hundreds of thousands of veterans are being violated by the Department of Veterans Affairs, "an agency that is in denial," and by a government health care system and appeals process for patients that is "broken down," Gordon Erspamer, lawyer for two advocacy groups, said in an opening statement at the trial of a nationwide lawsuit.

He said veterans are committing suicide at the rate of 18 a day - a number acknowledged by a VA official in a Dec. 15 e-mail - and the agency's backlog of disability claims now exceeds 650,000, an increase of 200,000 since the Iraq war started in 2003.

We're looking at the conflation of multiple claims here, so lets take them one at a time:

More than 120 veterans of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq commit suicide every week while the government stalls in granting returning troops the mental health treatment and benefits to which they are entitled, veterans advocates told a federal judge Monday in San Francisco.

There is no way to get a constant figure of X per week, but if they are presuming that 120/week figure from the beginning of the Iraq War on March 20, 2003, we're talking 1860 days (not including today), rounding down to 265 weeks * 120 suicides/week = 31,800 suicides of Iraq and Afghan War veterans.

If we instead presume they arrived at 120/week starting with the October 7, 2001 war with Afghanistan, we're looking at 2389 days (not including today), rounding down to 341 weeks * 120 suicides/week = 41,920 suicides of Iraq and Afghan War veterans.

Are they trying to tell us between 31,000-41,000 modern war veterans have committed suicide, and we're just now starting to notice, five years later?

The 18/suicides a day figure seems to quietly leave out which wars are covered, and could be construed to assume the aging veterans of WWII, Korean, Vietnam, and other campaigns as well as Iraq and Afghanistan. It would seem prudent to assume that many of these may be due to issues perhaps unrelated to PTSD caused a half-century or more before in many instances.

If they do mean all veterans, regardless of war, but measure from the start of the Afghan war at a rate of 18 suicides a day, we wind up with 43,002 suicides for all veterans of all wars during this time period. If we instead use the 18 suicides/day figure from the beginning of the Iraq War, we wind up with 33,480 suicides for all veterans of all wars during this time period.

Are they trying to tell us between 33,000-43,000 U.S. military war veterans have committed suicide in the past 5-8 years, and we're just now starting to notice?

According to the math cited here, the VA may be shorting veterans on care, but they excel at hidden burials.

We are not treating out veterans with nearly the care and respect for their service as we should, but I'd be shocked if we were losing as many as these figures suggest.

Yon: Moment of Truth

Was a busy weekend and I didn't get a chance to get into my copy of Michael Yon's Moment of Truth in Iraq beyond skimming a few pages, though I'm going to try to carve time out of my schedule to read it tonight. If it is anything like his dispatches, I'll probably devour it in one extended sitting.

It is already up to #68 on Amazon's bestseller list and Glenn Reynolds notes that is #1 in military books (and that it is excellent. He also notes that Mike has a page dedicated to help promoting the book so it gets in your local bookstores and libraries, and I'd simply note that if you really want the local library to stock it so that others might read a perspective of the war they might not get anywhere else, you can always buy multiple copies of Moment of Truth in Iraq and donate them directly to the library yourself.

As you already know by now, Mike is supported by his readers and his readers alone, so by purchasing his book, you're supporting his work.

Besides... wouldn't it send a message to Congress if we could make a book promoting the efforts of the Next Greatest Generation the #1 book in America?

In the Mail...

My friend Iraq War combat journalist Michael Yon just published his newest book, Moment of Truth in Iraq: How a New 'Greatest Generation' of American Soldiers is Turning Defeat and Disaster into Victory and Hope.

He sent me a copy, which was waiting for me when I got home last night. I'm going to try to carve some time out in my schedule to read it at some point this weekend or early next week and read it so I can give you a review.

Mike has spent more time embedded with soldiers in Iraq than any other journalist period, and therefore has a very good idea of what is actually happening in Iraq, something that rational people should consider when they read this article from him in today's Wall Street Journal.

Biden PWN3D Crocker! ...In the Community-Based Reality

For reasons rational people will never fathom, lefty bloggers and blog readers are filled with glee over, well, this:

There was once a blog called Joe Biden Is Thugged Out. (I swear this is true.) Biden just proved why. He asked Ryan Crocker, who used to be ambassador to Pakistan, whether it would be better for U.S. interests to go after Al Qaeda on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border or Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Crocker, in an impossible political position -- give the correct answer and humiliate the Bush administration; give the administration's answer and look like a fool -- dodged as much as he could. Then Biden forced him down. Crocker: "I would therefore pick Al Qaeda on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border."

Biden "forced him down" how, exactly?

Clearly Ackerman, the flickering bulbs at Think Progress and other gloating liberals didn't actually hear how Crocker responded.

Let's go to the videotape:

BIDEN: Mr. Ambassador, is Al Qaeda a greater threat to US interests in Iraq, or in the Afghan-Pakistan border region?

CROCKER: Mr. Chairman, al Qaeda is a strategic threat to the United States wherever it is--

BIDEN: Where is most of it? If you could take it out, you had a choice, the Lord Almighty came down and sat in the middle of the table there, and said, 'Mr. Ambassador, you can eliminate every al Qaeda source in Afghanistan and Pakistan, or every al Qaeda personnel in Iraq, which would you pick?'

CROCKER: Well, given the progress that has been made against al Qaeda in Iraq, the significant decrease in its capabilities, the fact that it is solidly on the defensive and not in a position as far--

BIDEN: Which would you pick?

CROCKER: I would therefore pick Al Qaeda in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border area.

So despite the cleverly truncated quote at Think Progress (seriously, when are lefty bloggers going to tire of being set up and used as fools by these shills?) and Ackerman's own deceptive forgetfulness, what Crocker actually told Biden is that our military had severely damaged the operational capabilities of al Qaeda in Iraq (by 75-percent in the last year alone, according to the Iraqi Interior Ministry) and knocked it into a defensive posture where it is far less of a threat.

How much less of a threat?

According to StrategyPage.com, Osama bin Laden admitted defeat in Iraq on Oct 22, 2007, a sentiment that Marine Colonel Richard Simcock shared contemporaneously as it related to al Qaeda's former strongholds in al Anbar in specific. Battered, tattered, and lethally-harassed by coalition soldiers at night and former Sunni Iraqi allies during the day, al Qaeda's morale in Iraq is crushed, along with most of it's capabilities.

Thanks to Iraqi and coalition efforts, Al Qaeda in Iraq is beaten, fragmented, and on the verge of a final collapse, according to the terror organization itself. With this enemy almost defeated, it is only common sense that Crocker would select the remaining al Qaeda hiding along the Afghan-Pakistani border as being the greater threat.

I guess Ackerman can pretend that Crocker's quite logical response--to advocate the targeting the terrorists that are still alive, instead of those we have already dispatched--is humiliating to the Bush administration, but outside his insular nutroots community, in a land where common sense prevails and truncated quotes are not swallowed at face value time and again, Crocker got the better of this exchange by merely pointing out that we've run out of al Qaeda in Iraq to kill.

As Sadr Collapses...

It becomes increasingly more amusing to watch the "impartial" international news media attempt to spin away unmistakable signs of progress in Iraq. The latest example of this sad phenomena is Reuters' account of Muqtada al Sadr's threat to end a ceasefire:

Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr threatened on Tuesday to end a truce he imposed on his militia last year, raising the prospect of worsening violence just as top U.S. officials prepare to testify on Iraq in Washington.

Sadr urged his Mehdi Army to "continue your jihad and resistance" against U.S. forces, although he did not spell out if this was an explicit call for attacks on American soldiers.

His warning came a day after Shi'ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki threatened to bar Sadr's movement from political life if the anti-American cleric did not disband his militia.

Despite the more than 7-month-old ceasefire, Sadr's followers have clashed with Iraqi troops and U.S. forces in the south of the country and Baghdad in the past two weeks in the country's worst violence since the first half of 2007.

al Sadr's Madhi Army suffered hundreds of KIAs—some estimate place as a high as 1%-2% of his entire militia—in operations across southern Iraq in recent weeks. The failure of the militia and the success of Iraqi forces has encouraged top Sunni, Shia and Kurdish members of the Iraqi government to form a unified front that has demanded that al Sadr disband the Madhi Army, or run the risk of having his party being disbarred from Iraqi politics.

Sadr's threat to end the truce is the most desperate political option available to him, and one of the few options he has left. His power has been drawn largely from the threat of withdrawing the ceasefire, but if that ceasefire is withdrawn, al Sadr has few more cards to play, and the resulting combat would likely mirror last recent combat on a much larger scale, perhaps resulting in far more physical destruction to his forces.

Sadr did not win in Basra, and runs the risk of having his militia destroyed if he decides to send it into combat again against an Iraqi Army that is far more competent than al Sadr's militiamen.

Muqtada al Sadr's relevance in Iraq will be determined by the choices he makes in coming days. The only real real question is how much his relevance will be diminished.

Rep. McHenry Calls Green Zone Security Guard "Two-bit"

Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) has referred to a "two-bit security guard" in the Green Zone in Baghdad who would not let him into the gym without having the proper ID.

What a jerk.

His political opponent Lance Sigmon is capitalizing on the statement, as he should, but I think those who are claiming that McHenry belittled a soldier are probably not accurate, or are at least jumping the gun.

The Green Zone certainly has American personnel, but many are Iraqis or foreign security personnel.

Somehow, I don't think the liberals at Think Progress who have built a reputation lately of getting the facts wrong would care nearly as much if McHenry had uttered his comments to a security guard contracted through Blackwater, even though they face many of the same risks.

Update: Yep, Amanda at Think Progress screwed up again. The guard in question was not a soldier, but instead was what liberals like to refer to as a "hired killer," or as the rest of us call them, a security contractor.

Amanda either needs a break, a new fact-checker, or a new career.

Chinese Provide IAEA With Info on Iranian Nukes

No detail at all in the report, but I think it logical to assume that if the news was that "there's nothing going on," then China would not have bothered to contact the IAEA. The assumption must be that Iran is progressing with their nuclear weapons program, and that China is growing uncomfortable with that progress.

It will be interesting to see what slips out about the details of the Iranian program provided by China to the IAEA. Have the Chinese now determined that Iran has become a threat to their national security as well?

Yon on the War

Michael Yon is in Mosul, where we thought the bulk of the fighting in Iraq would be over coming weeks as Iraqi Army units supported by American forces are preparing to route out the last of al Qaeda's significant urban presence.

I shot him an email yesterday to see what he may have heard, and he got back to me this briefly this morning to point me to telephone call he recorded with Glenn Reynolds. You can hear it here.

He's also got a new book coming coming out, and you can follow the links to pre-order it at the link above.

Great Moments in Military Procurement History. Or Not.

I have a pistol made in 1927, and have owned battle rifles and carbines made from 1945 to the Vietnam War-era. In these firearms I've more often fired modern ammunition of recent commercial manufacture, but I've also used surplus military ammunition, decades old. For many collectors of military firearms, shooting aging surplus ammunition is a commonplace proposition, and the results are generally acceptable.

There are however, several wars on, and civilian shooters in the United States are having to compete with government contractors who scrounge up that foreign surplus ammunition in large quantities to provide to U.S. allies under contract. The result is higher prices for quality surplus ammunition, or in some instances, little serviceable ammunition at any price.

The New York Times, God bless them, actually broke an interesting story today about one of those ammunition contractors, a 22-year-old Miami man who now seems to be in a great deal of trouble for selling Chinese ammunition he scrounged up on the world market and repackaged, which is a violation of federal law and his contract.

The relevant parts of this story are how the man in question, Efraim Diveroli, slipped through the cracks of the procurement system to become a supplier, and how some scrap-worthy ammunition was shipped to our allies. I'm sure as details of that SNAFU become available, they'll work to make sure that similar unvetted characters responding to vague RFPs can't game the system again.

I would take minor issue with the Times and other news outlets, however, for suggesting that older ammunition is inherently flawed or obsolete ammunition.

Ammunition can degrade over time based upon the chemical compounds used in its construction and the environmental variables under which it is stored. Ammunition manufactured to high standards and stored in specific, controlled conditions, however, can last almost indefinitely. Ammunition manufactured in the 1960s and properly stored can certainly still be viable and reliable, while ammunition created last week using substandard components may be scrap before it leaves the assembly line.

The author of the NY Times piece who broke the story, C.J. Chivers, deserves respect for some excellent investigative journalism.

Misreporting the Second Recent Iraqi Offensive

One of the wonderful things about modern communications technologies is that just about anyone can comment about popular culture and breaking news events as they happen. The downside? Just about anyone can comment about popular culture and breaking news event as they happen, and some of them work for news agencies.

The best examples of why this isn't always a good idea are the short-sighted, knee-jerk reactions of some journalists and pundits to the recent crackdown by the Iraqi central government on rogue Shiite militias and criminal gangs supported by Iran that have been operating in Baghdad and southern Iraqi cities.

For months and years we've had critics of the Iraq War whining that American forces would always be forced to take the lead in combat, that Iraqis were lazy and untrainable, and that Iraqi security forces were too corrupt to ever be regarded as a competent stabilizing force against rogue militias, Iranian infiltrators, and criminal gangs.

And yet as Iraqi security forces moved into Basra and elsewhere to combat criminal gangs and militias extorting profits from the nation's oil industry meant for distribution to all Iraqi's by the central government, do we hear anyone critical of U.S. and British involvement in Iraq praising Iraqi government forces as they mount their own major operations with limited U.S. involvement?

No.

Instead we get McClatchy's Washington "Truth to Power" Bureau running a headline that the attacks were "threatening success of U.S. surge." The truth, of course, is the exact opposite of what McClatchy reports.

Because the surge was successful and coincided with the Sawha movement among Sunni tribes, al Qaeda has been pushed into Mosul and the surrounding Ninevah province, where Iraqi security forces took the lead weeks ago in an operation that hopes to surround, cut off, and kill the last significant Sunni terrorist strongholds in Iraq.

Because of the success of the surge and the increasing competence of Iraqi security forces, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki decided that it was time to lead an offensive in Basra, a city long controlled by competing Shia militias that are often little more than criminal gangs. Maliki has given the militias 72 hours to lay down their arms or face "the most severe penalties."

Iraqi-led missions are targeting both Sunni and Shia extremists in hopes of asserting the monopoly of force any country must have for stability, moves that should be seen as encouraging for Iraq's long-term future.

Sadly, most reporters and ( like-minded bloggers) seemed bogged down in viewing the still-breaking news stories in Sadr City, Kut, Basra, and other Iraq cities through the prism of short-term U.S. domestic political consumption, an arena in which they would hope to exert a corrupting influence.

For many of these people, success is not an option, initiative is to be panned, and gains made are to be spun away or minimized until a Democrat wins the White House and the war can be properly lost.

Unfortunately for them, the Iraqis seem to be taking an acute interest in determining the future of their nation on their terms, not those terms dictated by the media, Iran and others championing defeat.

The Prime Minister of Iraq is all but publicly daring Muqtada al-Sadr and his Iranian allies to engage Iraqi government forces to determine the future of Iraq, a battle that the Iraq government's forces would win convincingly.

These are moments of growth for Iraq's fledgling democracy worth celebrating... providing of course, you want the nation to succeed.

The Sadrists' Mistake

The Guardian claimed that the "surge" in Iraq was about to unravel because of strike threats from Sunni militiamen they reported last week, but if you head over to a newly-redesigned Pajamas Media today, you'll see that the threats of a strike were resolved weeks before the Guardian stories ran.

The stories were an attempt to grab defeat in the media while the threat of actual defeat on the ground seems ever more fleeting.

Yesterday, left-wing surrogate McClatchy Newspapers—they even has the ridiculous "Truth to Power" tagline—attempted to claim defeat from the opposite perspective, noting that some of the Sadrists in Iraq seem to be feeling a bit rambunctious after a long period of relative silence.

The left side of the blogosphere, always willing to latch on to even the hint of bad news without even pretending to vet their sources, were quick to declare this as reason 6,578,902 that we've already lost the war in Iraq and it is time for our troops to come home, or to at least within spitting distance.

Reality, of course, is another story.

It has long been known that at some point the Iraqi government would have to take on the criminal element that gravitated to the Sadrists, and unfortunately for these Sadrists, they waited far too long to engage. They haven't stood a chance of a military victory against IA forces for at least two years, which is why al Sadr himself continues to issue ceasefires from the safety of Tehran. Recent attempts by Sadrists to use threats and the force of arms for political ends is now likely to consolidate the power of the central government behind a string of Sadrist defeats in Basra and Baghdad.

Those on the left seem to think that any deviation from stasis in Iraq is a sign of failure, but the fact is that for a society to be stable, the government must first establish a monopoly of force.

Part of that involves either incorporating or destroying militias. In Sunni provinces, the Iraqi government is slowly incorporating the Sons of Iraq into both security and non-security positions even as they root-out the remains of al Qaeda. In Shiite areas including parts of Baghdad and Basra, this means eliminating the influence of criminal gangs hiding under al Sadr's banner.

The conflict isn't exactly a welcome development—even a temporary increase in violence will impact the innocent—but the longer-term consolidation of power by the federal government requires an eventual dissolution of Sadr's militia. Most hoped that such a dissolution of al Sadr's power would be purely political in nature, but the Sadrist gangs seem to have made the mistake of engaging Iraq's modernized security forces directly, the resolution of the long-expected inter-sect conflict will likely be more immediate than most expected, and much to Muqtada al-Sadr's dismay.

Not Ready To End the Fight

Via AP at Hot Air, Marine Cpl. David Thibodeaux's stirring response to MoveOn.org and the Dixie Chicks.

Somehow, I don't think Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton (or their supporters) will be big fans.

Fallon Gonged in Favor of Petraeus

Admiral William Fallon, Commander, U.S. Central Command, is resigning:

Adm. William Fallon, the top U.S. military commander for the Middle East, is resigning, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday.

Gates said Fallon had asked him Tuesday morning for permission to retire and Gates agreed. Gates said the decision was entirely Fallon's and that Gates believed it was "the right thing to do."

Fallon was the subject of an article published last week in Esquire magazine that portrayed him as opposed to President Bush's Iran policy. It described Fallon as a lone voice against taking military action to stop the Iranian nuclear program.

Gates described as "ridiculous" any notion that Fallon's departure signals the United States is planning to go to war with Iran. And he said "there is a misperception" that Fallon disagrees with the administration's approach to Iran.

"I don't think there were differences at all," Gates added.

I suspect that there will be those on the fringe left who will be screeching about how Fallon's resignation is the prelude to a preemptive war with Iran—probably before I even finish this sentence—no doubt suggested by a certain Esquire article that stated the quite fanciful claim that "it's left to Fallon--and apparently Fallon alone..." to keep Dubya from bombing Iran into the stone age.

Barnett seems to have completely overlooked the fact that it has been Tehran, not Washington, that has publicly promised not just war, but genocide (but then, in the same article, it was Burnett that claimed Fallon was "waging peace" with the Chinese in his prior assignment, even as Fallon's replacement expressed concern over massive increases in Chinese military spending, so consider the source), but that probably has little to do with his resignation at this time.

No, as Blackfive rightly notes, Fallon's retirement comes not because of friction with the Bush Administration (though there may have been some), but because General David Patraeus is coming to town, no doubt as the Administration's favored choice to lead Central Command after his implementation of COIN strategy in Iraq.

My guess? Lieutenant General Raymond T. Odierno, who executed the surge so well, backfills Petraeus as Commanding General, (MNF-I).

Homegrown IED Targets Manhattan Military Recruiting Station

The NY Times City Room blog has the latest details:

The police have attributed the blast to an improvised explosive device, and police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said the device had been placed in an ammunition box like the kind that can be bought at a military supply store. Mr. Kelly spoke with Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg at a news conference at 9:30 a.m. in Times Square. The authorities are looking into a possible connection to two earlier bombings at foreign consulates in Manhattan, in 2005 and 2007. Official said that in today’s attack, a man in a gray hooded sweatshirt was seen leaving the scene on a bicycle. Subways and traffic are running normally through Times Square.

They also have a useful slideshow of images from the scene, which gives us just enough information to start making some inferences about the bomb and the bomber.

Looking at images 1-3 in the slideshow, you'll note that the damage from the blast seems relatively minor. Image 1 give you a pretty good idea of precisely where the bomb was placed, as you can see how the shrapnel radiated out from a central point, which appears to have been (as we face the building) almost dead-center in front of the plate-glass window.

Slightly enlarging the same photo and cropping it to focus on the recruiting center front helps to see the central radiating point of the blast a bit better.

You'll also note in this closer view, and in the second and third images of the scene, that there was no attempt to make this an anti-personnel weapon, as there is no evidence of there being ball bearing, BBs, or another other sort of shrapnel that would form an intentional secondary blast mechanism.

The time of the blast was around 3:43 AM, when pedestrian traffic in the area is typically light and the recruiting station was closed. From the time of the blast and lack of shrapnel, we can make the guarded assumption that causing casualties was not the bomber's intention.

We can also infer that the bomber had no intention of destroying the targeted building as well, as the blast was small, and the ammunition can that carried the device could have easily held far more explosives.

From the choice of target, lack of shrapnel, and low amount of explosives used, I think it only logical to conclude that the blast was political in nature, a violent though purposefully less-lethal bomb, if you can ever call an improvised explosive device "less lethal." For these reasons, I doubt it was the act of Islamic extremists.

This was an act of domestic terrorism.

I do not, however, feel comfortable blaming any specific anti-war group for this act, or even pinning this as an anti-war act at this point in time.

Anti-war groups, in general, are non-violent in nature, and those that lean towards the anarchist fringe that are violence prone tend towards vandalism, and generally, don't have the technical expertise to manufacture even such a simple device.

Whoever built this bomb may have sympathies towards the anti-war movement and/or anti-military feelings, but I would be surprised to find them affiliated officially with any specific anti-war or anti-military group, and would be even more surprised if anyone inside one of these groups had advance knowledge of the attack.

There are some news accounts noting that there were similar minor blasts carried out against the Mexican and British consulates in New York in recent years, each using blackpowder inside inert hand grenade casings, also carried out by a bomber on a bicycle.

This seems quite plausible, but we won't know more until the FBI announces the findings of their investigation.

Update: A reminder, via Ace-of-Spades, that the peace-loving left isn't always so peace-leaving:

Thirty-Eight Years Ago Today

March 6, 1970 at 11:55 a.m.

Three members of the radical activist group known as the Weather Underground, Diana Oughton, Ted Gold and Terry Robbins, blew themselves straight to hell when the bomb they were building, which was intended to blow up a dance at Fort Dix, exploded in an otherwise quiet New York neighborhood.

Had they been better bomb-makers, instead of killing themselves, they would have killed an untold number of American soldiers. In the name of peace.

Luckily, the Weathermen's expertise at bomb-making left much to be desired.

The Weathermen's hatred of the United States manifested itself in the bombings of the U.S. Capitol building, New York City Police Headquarters, the Pentagon, and the National Guard offices in Washington, D.C. The Weathermen's leader, Bill Ayers summed up the Weathermen's ideology as follows: "Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, Kill your parents."

Yes, the Bill Ayer's above is the same man that has had Barack Obama as a dinner guest, and who served with Obama on the board of directors of the left-leaning Woods Fund from 1999 until 2002.

Diana Oughton, one of the deceased, was Ayer's girlfriend until some of the 100 pounds of dynamite they intended to use to bomb a non-commissioned officers' dance at Fort Dix detonated.

Update: Hot Air has surveillance video of the bike-riding bomber approaching the recruiting center, and the NYPD thinks they have his bike.

Was the suspect smart enough to wipe his prints from the bike?

Update: The bomber sent an anti-war manifesto to eight NY Democratic Congressmen.

Update: Coincidence? Authorities are now saying the anti-war activist that mailed the "We did it!" letters to Congress had nothing to do with the recruiting center blast.

Savages

I've watched for several days the story that has grown out of a short, grainy video that shows a Marine in Iraq throwing a puppy to its death.

The act shown in the video, whether it shows a real sadistic act of animal abuse or a Marine with a warped sense of humor throwing a stuffed animal, is sickening.

Perhaps even more sickening is the mob mentality that has overtaken some of those who have viewed the video, who took it upon themselves to post the names and home address of the Marine alleged to be in the video and that of his family members, inviting other Web vigilantes to commit violent acts against them.

It is understandable to be outraged by the act shown whether is if fake or real, but does any rational human being think that an appropriate response to such an act would be the rape or murder of innocent family members, as some have called for? As for the Marine at the center of the controversy, he is currently under protective custody because of threats against his life.

There seems to be far more outrage over this video of animal abuse than far more sadistic and frequent reports of greater acts of brutality committed against human civilians by militias, terrorists, insurgents, and criminals in Iraq. I wonder why that is.

Where are the Internet detectives on Digg when al Qaeda in Iraq shows video of a car bomb that wipes out innocent families? Why are these Youtube and blog denizens not clamoring to discover the identities and home addresses of Islamic fundamentalist thugs that film decapitations and torture?

Sadly, there is far less outrage for these human victims, and occasionally, there are even attempts to rationalize their inhuman brutality.

I'm sure that if they were asked about it today, every politician in Washington would tell you that they were "shocked and appalled" at the actions of the Marine in the video, and yet, most Congressional Democrats, including Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, would help set the stage for far worse in Iraq with a headlong, unconditional withdrawal that would make such depravity far more possible.

They seek to knowingly and willfully abandon Iraq to those would would do far worse than throw that nation's civilians down a ravine, because they think the war costs too much, or because it is unpopular with their constituents.

So many of the same people who have whipped up so much outrage over a dog are indifferent to greater depredations visited upon Iraqi women and children... and yet they claim that the Marine in the video is the savage among us.

Live By the Bomb, Die By the Bomb

Imad Mughniyeh, the "original bin Laden" has been killed by a car bomb in Damascus, Syria.

It couldn't happen to a nicer guy:

Imad Mughniyeh, the Hezbollah mastermind behind the kidnapping of Westerners in Beirut and many big terror attacks around the world in the 1980s and 1990s, was killed late last night in a car bomb explosion in Damascus.

There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the attack, which occurred in the Syrian capital’s smart Kfar Soussa district, although Hezbollah blamed Israeli agents.

His death is a huge blow to the Iranian-backed militant group, given Mughniyeh's years of experience and organisational skills.

He was commander of Hezbollah's military wing, which he helped to build up into the formidable machine that fought the Israeli Army to a standstill in the war of summer 2006.

Israel's Mossad was quickly fingered by Hezbollah as being responsible for the assassination, which the Israeli's have officially denied, probably between toasts.

Scotland Yard: Blast Killed Bhutto

In The Sun:

British officials are set to release a summary later today of a report on the probe into PPP Party chief Bhutto’s December 27 death.

Scotland Yard investigators said Bhutto died from a severe headwound as she was thrown by the force of the blast.

They also said that the attack was carried out by a single person who blew himself up after opening fire, not by two as authorities had originally reported.

The finding supports the Pakistani Government’s version of events.

But what about the bullet theory, seemingly supposed by video? As I noted December 31:

While the new film shows her hair and shawl moving, however, it is not conclusive.

Unlike the Zapruder-filmed assassination (YouTube) of John F. Kennedy, however, there is not the spray of flesh and bone one might have expected from a pistol blast at near contact range of approximately six feet.

The ballistics expert interviewed by Channel 4, Roger Gray, notes the concussive blast of the bullet hitting her hair and shawl and suggests that it indicates a bullet strike on the left side of Bhutto's head. There were not, however, any direct signs of an invasive impact to Bhutto's skull as seen with Kennedy, just the movement of her hair and shawl. One might think that a bullet hitting Bhutto on the left side of the skull, penetrating, and exiting the right side of her skull would have shown signs of exiting in the form of a spray of blood and bone, which was not evident in the film footage.

So while it is probable that Bhutto was struck by a bullet, it is not conclusive, and the government account of her hitting her head cannot be conclusively ruled out.

In short, Scotland Yard seems to bring us back to square one: the seemingly bizarre Pakistani claim that Bhutto was killed when the blast threw her against the right rear sunroof latch of the armored car in which she was riding. The claim, however, is the only one that seems to make logical sense if the assassin's bullet did in fact miss.

Ever helpful, the Bhutto family has refused a request to have an autopsy performed, and her political party instead issues forth absurd claims that she was killed with a laser.

It seems that the Bhutto family is far more concerned with supporting the story of her martyrdom by an assassin's bullet than seeking what may be a less glamorous martyrdom by the force of the suicide blast throwing her skull against the right rear sunroof latch. If they continue to refuse an autopsy, we can only surmise they are more interested in preserving mythology than divining the facts.

Acts of Desperation

I wrote several days ago about how the use of mentally-disabled suicide bombers showed just how desperate al Qaeda in Iraq in was/is becoming, stating:

These attacks today serve to show that al Qaeda in Iraq is not quite finished, but then, that is something we already knew. What is does show us is just how desperate they are to retain relevance in a war that is going very badly for them.

Far from today's attacks being a sign of the "surge" in Iraq failing, the extraordinary lengths al Qaeda was forced to take to carry out these attacks show that the "surge" and the COIN doctrine implemented by General Petraeus are working precisely as we'd hoped.

A story published today showing that al Qaeda is now training children to carry out attacks merely confirms that theory.

Al Qaeda propaganda tapes released by the Pentagon reveal a possible new trend in the group's terror strategy in Iraq.

The tapes, obtained by FOXNews and later released to the media, are training videos showing black-masked Iraqi children between 6 and 14 being taught how to hold AK-47s, how to stop a car and carry out a kidnapping, how to break into a house and how to break into a courtyard and terrorize the individuals living there.

Footage aired for reporters showed an apparent training operation in which the boys are shown storming a house and holding guns to the heads of mock residents. Another tape showed a young boy wearing a suicide vest and posing with automatic weapons.

They also are seen being taught to use rocket-propelled grenade launchers.

"These were young boys all masked and hooded, all outfitted with weapons; adults were doing the training," said Rear Adm. Greg Smith, a spokesman for Multinational Forces Iraq.

"Al Qaeda is clearly using children to exploit other children to get the interest of Jihad spread among teenagers far and wide. They use this footage on the Internet to encourage other young boys to join the jihad movement."

al Qaeda has been forced to a point where it is recruiting children to fight for it in Iraq, attempting to indoctrinate them at a young age to become acolytes of terror. While this is hardly unknown in terrorist cultures outside of Iraq—it is disturbingly common to see Palestinians indoctrinate their children this way—it has been very rare in Iraq, where al Qaeda has a desperate need for fighters now, not years from now. The children al Qaeda is training are trained for current operations.

This strongly suggests, like did the use of mentally disabled women last week, that al Qaeda is increasingly unable to find military-aged men in Iraq to carry out their attacks.

Last week at liberal blog Newshoggers, Libby called the use of mentally-disabled female suicide bombers as " a sign of adaptation and a brilliant one at that" before asking, "Perhaps Mr. Owens can educate me on how our troops are supposed to counter this new evil tactic? That would be helpful."

The quite obvious answer that she should have been able to grasp on her own was that we are successfully countering al Qaeda, using the exact COIN doctrine that she and her fellow liberals still refuse to recognize as working.

al Qaeda is forced to go to such lengths as using the mentally infirm and impressionable children as foot soldiers precisely because the COIN strategy being implemented by coalition military forces and Iraqi security forces and CLCs, is depriving the insurgents and terrorists of their base of support. Without popular support from significant sections of the population, insurgencies are doomed to fail.

While horrific and speaking a great deal about their depravity, these acts show that al Qaeda in Iraq and associated insurgent groups and criminal gangs are increasingly desperate. The proven COIN doctrine being implemented against these groups is increasingly more effective. Far from being able to brilliantly adapt, al Qaeda in Iraq has once again been proven itself to be incapable of long-term success, or even survival.

How the Mighty Have Fallen

Two suicide attacks on pet markets in Baghdad today have left approximately 100 killed and twice as many wounded. Both attacks used women "with Down's syndrome" according the the Daily Mail and less specifically, they were described as "mentally disabled" according to CNN.

Both bombs appear to have been remote detonated. These women probably did not know they were carrying explosives at all, and it would probably be fair to include them among the victims.

The ever-objective, ever-unbiased New York Times saw fit to exclude the horrific detail of their alleged mental disabilities from their reporting of the day's massacre. It might upset their readers, and cause some confusion over who the real enemy in Iraq is (George Bush).

With tedious predictability, bloggers on the political left jumped with self-satisfaction at the opportunity to write about the attack, "proof" in their eyes, at last, that the "surge" of American forces into Iraq, which they so reviled, was a (blessed) failure.

Kevin Hayden wrote mockingly at the American Street:

How’s your surge, Mr. Oil Crony president?

It's not working so hot for Iraqis.

But Exxon seems to think it's peachy. I wonder if they plan to send flowers and a thank you note to the families of the 3943 US troops who died to make Exxon richer than 2/3rds of the planet's countries.

How many troops per gallon does your car get?

His deep and abiding concern for the men, women, and children killed in the attack, and those injured, must have been saved for a later post.

At Newshoggers, Libby was quick to jump to the occasion to declare the war lost:

I've never understood how people were lulled into thinking the surge really succeeded in establishing security in Iraq. It seemed rather apparent, even to my under-schooled eyes, that the surge was a gimmick. It reminded me of those bait and switch promotions that unscrupulous retailers used to engage in. The surge raised the violence to greater levels and then lowered the numbers with artificial manipulatons [sic] to a level that had been judged unacceptable when the surge began. But all that too many Americans seemed to notice was that the levels dropped. For some reson[sic], the relative metrics just didn't register.

The surge, you see (like spell-check) is a gimmick in Libby's eyes, and the very real drop in attacks and casualties around Iraq because of the application of COIN doctrine is just the result of artificial "manipulatons," whatever they may be.

Both, of course, miss the larger picture in their desire, their need to prove their worldview right. But she is right in one regard... she is "under-schooled" in how this war is being fought, and why it is being won.

These attacks today are not the first time al Qaeda in Iraq has stooped to using female suicide bombers. They have been used several times, including twice earlier this month in Diyala.

This tells us several things.

First, it tells us that al Qaeda in Iraq recognizes that attempts to use male suicide bombers and vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIEDs), their preferred method of suicide attacks for those seeking martyrdom, are no longer effective. These attacks fail because the combination of coalition military forces, Iraqi security forces, and neighborhood militias, known as "concerned local citizens" (CLCs) creating a security system that increasingly works, and makes it very unlikely that these preferred attacks will succeed. There is also some speculation that the influx of would-be foreign suicide bombers into Iraq is drying up.

Today's attacks also tell us that al Qaeda in Iraq is getting very desperate in seeking the high-casualty attacks that they so value. They were forced to scrape the bottom of the proverbial barrel, and use not only women (which they'd prefer to subjugate), but mentally disabled women at that, suggesting that finding willing volunteers is becoming ever more difficult.

These attacks today serve to show that al Qaeda in Iraq is not quite finished, but then, that is something we already knew. What is does show us is just how desperate they are to retain relevance in a war that is going very badly for them.

Far from today's attacks being a sign of the "surge" in Iraq failing, the extraordinary lengths al Qaeda was forced to take to carry out these attacks show that the "surge" and the COIN doctrine implemented by General Petraeus are working precisely as we'd hoped.

Update: The NY Times has updated the original article to now include a contribution from Mudhafer al-Husaini. It now includes commentary about the mental disability of the suicide bombers... buried 15 paragraphs into the now much longer story.

IHT still has up an original version of this story as it ran earlier, which I've copied into the comments as well.

Predator: 12 13, Al Qaeda: 0

I wrote earlier this week about militants killed in a missile strike in Pakistan. At the time, I speculated that they were going after "high-value targets" (HVTs), and speculated that the attack may have been a U.S. Predator drone strike like the one that targeted al Qaeda's Number 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri in 2006.

According to Michelle Malkin, It looks like they may have targeting someone else, as noted in this Reuters article:

A leading al Qaeda member in Afghanistan, Abu Laith al-Libi, has been killed, a Web site often used by the group and other Islamists said on Thursday.

A banner on the Ekhlaas.org site said Libi had fallen as a martyr, without giving further details.

It was not immediately clear if Libi's death was linked to a suspected U.S. missile strike that killed up to 13 foreign militants in Pakistan's North Waziristan region this week.

The attack had targeted second or third tier al Qaeda leaders, according to residents in the tribal area.

Tribesmen in the area had said a deputy of Libi, a senior al Qaeda leader, had been staying there and was among the dead, according to an intelligence official.

It remains to be seen if any other high-ranking al Qaeda figures were among the 12 killed, and whether or not it was, in fact, a U.S. drone operating well inside Pakistan. An earlier AP report seems to suggest that possibility:

A resident said an armed drone may have carried out the strike.

"We could see a small, white plane flying over the village for the past several days," villager Dildar Khan said.

An Interior Ministry spokesman said he had no information about any missile strike.

The government often uses airstrikes to attack militants in areas that its ground forces and artillery cannot reach, but some of the aerial attacks near the border in recent years are believed to have been launched by missile-armed U.S. drones flying from Afghanistan.

Authorities in both the U.S. and Afghanistan have denied knowledge of such operations.

Sure they do. It doesn't make the terrorists any less dead.

More from Reuters, which also leans towards a predator strike in Pakistan:

An intelligence official, however, told Reuters on Thursday that based on information gleaned from tribal contacts there were seven Arabs and six Central Asians killed.

He said the attack was believed to have been carried out by a pilotless U.S. Predator aircraft flown across the nearby border with Afghanistan.

"The missile appeared to have been fired by a drone," the intelligence official said.

The Pakistani authorities have not confirmed the attack, and the Pentagon has denied taking any action, but the Defense Department does not speak for the Central Intelligence Agency, which operates Predators that the tribesmen say carried out the attack late on Monday.

Villagers saw two drones flying over the area before the attack. They didn't see the missile being fired but one heard a plane's engine before the explosion.

The same report states that in addition to Abu Laith al Libi, Obaidah al Masri may have been another target of the attack. al Masri was reportedly the leader of the 2006 UK-based plot to bomb transatlantic airliners.

Silence of the Media Lambs

A current employee of the Department of Homeland Security, who spoke to Pajamas Media on the condition of anonymity, had this to say: "It is mind-boggling. I've sent personal emails to my contacts at ABC, at CBS, at the New York Times, and the Washington Times. No one is even responding to my emails. They call me back about other things, but as far as Sibel [Edmonds] is concerned, anything touching on that subject gets overlooked, gets ignored."

"Why?" this reporter asked.

"Reporters are terrified of the State Secrets Privilege and being subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury. No one wants to wind up like Judy Miller — in jail."

What are they covering up? If Annie Jacobsen is correct, nuclear treason at the State Department.

Why?

Targeting Zawahiri?

Interesting...

Twelve suspected militants died in a missile strike on a home in northwestern Pakistan on Tuesday, officials said.

The attack occurred after midnight in Khushali Torikhel, a village in North Waziristan, a tribal region bordering Afghanistan, an intelligence and a government official in the region said.

There was no immediate official confirmation of the attack. The two officials who spoke did so on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to make media comments.

Pakistan has been trying to tamp down on militancy in its border regions, where elements of Al Qaeda and the Taliban are believed to operate.

Technically, the Pakistani military has the capability to launch guided missiles from both ground platforms (given the terrain and effective range, unlikely) and from aircraft (more likely), but considering the proximity to the Afghan border and the fact that the strike happened at nighttime, I would hardly be surprised to find out that a U.S. Predator armed with Hellfire missiles made the strike. If that was the case, I would not be surprised to see that leaked out over coming days.

Of course, if this was a U.S. strike, the next logical question is to ask if they were after any high value targets (HVTs) in particular.

In January of 2006, a Predator fired missiles into a compound on the Pakistan border in hopes of taking out al Qaeda's Number 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's chief deputy. The 2006 strike missed Zawahiri.

Could we have been more fortunate this time?

"The Final Battle"

Iraqi military forces are closing in on the northern Iraqi city of Mosul following a massive HBIED (home or structural improvised explosive device) killed 40 and wounded 220 on Wednesday, and a smaller blast by a suicide bomber dressed as a policeman killed the Nineveh province police director and tour others as they inspected the blast site.

"We have set up an operations room in Nineveh to complete the final battle with al Qaeda along with guerrillas and members of the previous regime,"militants the government says remain loyal to former leader Saddam Hussein.

"Today our forces started moving to Mosul. What we are planning in Nineveh will be decisive," he said during a ceremony for victims of violence in the holy Shi'ite southern city of Kerbala, broadcast on state television.

Maliki gave no details of the number of Iraqi troops involved or the scale of the operation. Defence Ministry spokesman Mohammed al-Askari did not have details but said it had been launched at Maliki's request.

"Security is very weak there and the security forces need to be reinforced," Askari said.

As noted above in the article by Reuters' Aws Qusay, there have not been any details provided about the composition of the Iraqi forces or their numbers, but what Maliki and Askari state seems to indicate that the offensive may be entirely Iraq in nature, a claim I'm attempting to verify with U.S. military public affairs in Iraq.

Iraqi forces are "in the lead" in 9 of 18 Iraqi provinces with other province hand-overs expected in 2008, and during Ashura, Iraqi security forces led security operations that successfully protected over 2 million pilgrims. But outside of Iraq, "taking the lead" for security in 9 provinces and securing Ashura events simply isn't the kind of security success easily grasped by either journalists or the public at large.

If—and it is an "if"—they do indeed engage in a large urban clearing operation carried out exclusively by Iraqi forces, however, it would seem to be a "Virginia Slims" moment that the American public can grasp on to as a a tangible success.

For an Iraqi military that has been disparaged for so long, it would be nice to say, "You've come a long way, baby."

Saddam Lied, People Died

Don't expect this to penetrate to consciousness of those who bought the CPI report unapologetically and uncritically, they won't let George Bush off the hook, no matter the reality:

Saddam Hussein initially didn't think the U.S. would invade Iraq to destroy weapons of mass destruction, so he kept the fact that he had none a secret to prevent an Iranian invasion he believed could happen. The Iraqi dictator revealed this thinking to George Piro, the FBI agent assigned to interrogate him after his capture...

..."He told me he initially miscalculated... President Bush's intentions. He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998...a four-day aerial attack," says Piro. "He survived that one and he was willing to accept that type of attack." "He didn't believe the U.S. would invade?" asks Pelley, "No, not initially," answers Piro.

Once the invasion was certain, says Piro, Saddam asked his generals if they could hold the invaders for two weeks. "And at that point, it would go into what he called the secret war," Piro tells Pelley. But Piro isn't convinced that the insurgency was Saddam's plan. "Well, he would like to take credit for the insurgency," says Piro.

Saddam still wouldn't admit he had no weapons of mass destruction, even when it was obvious there would be military action against him because of the perception he did. Because, says Piro, "For him, it was critical that he was seen as still the strong, defiant Saddam. He thought that [faking having the weapons] would prevent the Iranians from reinvading Iraq," he tells Pelley.

He also intended and had the wherewithal to restart the weapons program. "Saddam] still had the engineers. The folks that he needed to reconstitute his program are still there," says Piro. "He wanted to pursue all of WMD…to reconstitute his entire WMD program." This included chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, Piro says.

It seems like The Center for Public Integrity and The Fund for Independence in Journalism have some explaining to do...

Suicide Attacks Thwarted in Spain

Must be those pesky Methodists:

The Spanish judge overseeing the arraignment of 10 terrorism suspects said Wednesday that they had "planned to carry out a series of suicide attacks" last weekend on public transportation in Barcelona.

In a sequence of six-page rulings, one for each of the 10 suspects he ordered to be held in jail after their arraignments.

"Judge Ismael Moreno wrote that the suspects "had achieved human operational capacity and were very close to achieving full technical capacity with explosives, with the aim of using the those explosives for a jihadi terrorist attack, and it can be deduced that the members of the terrorist cell now broken up planned to carry out a series of suicide attacks last weekend, January 18 to 20, against public transport in the city of Barcelona."

Marine Hero's Widow Scammed, But Not Forgotten

1st Lt. Dustin Shumney with Conner, Jordan, Mallory, and Julie Shumney.

[text and images via patdollard.com.]

1st Lt. Dustin Shumney was a devout Catholic, dedicated officer, family man, and Iraq War hero.

His widow Julie, and their three children Jordan, 15; Mallory, 11; Conner, 6 were awarded the Bronze Star with the Combat ‘V’ device on August 4, 2005 as a result of his heroic actions in Fallujah, Iraq while serving as the commander of 2nd platoon, Charlie Company, Battalion Landing Team for Hawaii based 1st Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment, 3rd Marine Division, III Marine Expeditionary Force.

He led his men fearlessly into Fallujah in November of 2004. Shumney’s confidence, proficiency and warfighting spirit made a positive impact on his platoon’s ability to fight.

And fight they did. Few men have ever exercised the type of bravery exhibited by Shumney and his men. From throwing live enemy grenades that landed at his feet back at the enemy, to leading his men through dangerous minefields, to clearing houses filled with suicidal insurgents, all the while under sporadic mortar, RPG, and small arms fire.

Articles have been written. Heroes have been recognized. Medals have been awarded.

Many posthumously.

Lt. Shumney died on Jan. 26, 2005, when the CH-53E Sea Stallion helicopter he and his men were using for transport crashed due to a sandstorm about 200 miles from Baghdad near Ar Rutbah, Iraq killing all on board. Approximately 30 Marines and one sailor perished in the crash making it one of the deadliest days for U.S. troops since the initial invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

On that day, Julie Shumney became a widow, and the three children she and Dustin had lovingly brought into the world, Jordan, Mallory, and Conner, became fatherless.

One of the most noble things a person can do, is to help widows and orphans during their “time of trouble.“

The harshness of the reality that her soulmate would never walk through their front door again and take her in his arms, the emptiness that Daddy would never again tuck them into their beds, kiss them goodnight and chase away the boogeymen; the knowledge that he would never be there to lead, guide, play with, and love their children again, is a time of trouble no decent person would ever wish upon any other.

In times like those, friends and family should come together, band around the widow and the fatherless, and give them aid and comfort.

This is the tale of two men who preyed upon this widow and her fatherless children, in their time of trouble, and bilked them out of $57,000.

Arguably, one of the best ways a person can work through grief is to give oneself to a charitable cause. This is what Julie Shumney did. She held a Bible study at her house with people from her church, and through the course of those weekly meetings she came up with the idea to raise money to give to various Christian outreach programs around the country.

More specifically, a program that would give money to Iraq War widows and orphans. This was especially dear to her. She wanted to help those who would go through what she had been going through.

This is where Julie Shumney’s heart is, to help those truly in need.

“I just was wanting to give back,” Julie said.

Enter Jeff, an evangelist from her church, who also led the weekly Bible study in Julie’s house, he seemed like a nice enough guy. And when the idea to help Iraq War widows and orphans came about, Jeff told Julie about a friend of his named Ken.

Jeff explained that Ken had had some success in an eBay business that revolved around buying truckloads of returned electronics merchandise from national chain stores like Circuit City and Wal-Mart at a greatly reduced price. They go through the items, salvaging what they can and putting them up for sale on eBay.

According to Jeff and Ken, their first investor, a man named Hencer, had fronted them the money needed to get that business going, and Hencer claimed he had received his initial investment back with no problem.

What could go wrong? The nice evangelist guy has a friend with a tried and true method that could help them raise lots of money to give to Iraq War widows and orphans. Her idea was that they would recoup the initial investment and give the profits to the widows and orphans charity, then take that initial investment and buy another truckload of reduced electronics, etc etc…and continue the cycle of charitable giving.

Sounded like a good plan for a good cause.

They drew up a contract. Julie gave them a Cashier’s Check for $40,000 with the stipulation that $5,000 be used to help “start up” the business, and that nobody made any profit off of the venture, that the profits would go to the charities. Contract signed, check handed over, Julie felt good. She felt that she might be able to help make a difference in the lives of those who would be going through one of the worst times of their lives.

Both Jeff and Kenneth had said that the project would be a side thing for them, that they would be volunteering their time with the project in the spirit of giving, and helping the Iraq war widows and orphans.

But soon afterward, things started to go bad. The contract they had signed had mysteriously disappeared. Whenever Julie would call Ken or Jeff to check on how things were going, she would get conflicting stories.

Things weren’t adding up.

But Julie, being a good Christian, believed that because they were also Christians, brothers in the faith, she should give them the benefit of the doubt.

Then one day, Jeff the evangelist came to Julie in tears. He said he was unable to live with himself knowing what he knew and that he was losing sleep, and his conscience was eating away at him.

He told her that Ken had been pocketing the money. That Ken had bought a car for his wife with it, that he had been making his own house payments with it, that he had been simply spending it as if it were his own money. Jeff went on to tell Julie that he himself had been unfaithful with the funds, paying for an expensive school for his own son, as well as numerous other personal bills.

Julie said “Well, let’s go get my electronics from your garage then. They belong to me.”

Jeff agreed. But Jeff said that Ken was a dangerous person with a criminal background. That there was no telling what he would do if he was confronted with his wrongdoing. So they decided initially, to not tell Ken that Jeff had informed Julie of the deception. Instead they took the merchandise, rented a warehouse, and moved it there. Then, Jeff told Ken that he was no longer part of the project.

Jeff then told Julie they needed to buy another smaller truckload of electronics to try and help recoup her losses, and Julie reluctantly agreed on the condition that she send the money directly to the company that was selling the truckload of electronics, and she did that.

Jeff brought in a man named Brandon, who was supposedly an honest guy, to help.

Soon after they started operating, Jeff said that Paypal kept shutting them down and they didn’t know why. Jeff gave Julie some excuse about eBay, which she found hard to believe. Julie knew it was time to just shut it down. Brandon came to her and told her that things with Jeff were “not as they seemed.”

Julie ended recouping only $7,000 of her $57,000 investment. Ken had threatened her if she tried to come after him for her money back. Apparently these two guys run some ministry called John G. Lake.org.

I talked to Julie on the phone this afternoon. Her income, which was supposed to be from an annuity is gone because she had to liquidate the annuity. She is having a hard time making ends meet.

She wants to pursue the matter legally, but that also takes money that she doesn’t have.

An Iraq War Hero’s widow and fatherless children need your help.

Click above to donate directly to Julie Shumney’s Paypal account.

Prayers for "Big Country"

Long-time CY commenter William "Big Country" Coughlin is recovering in the United States from wounds sustained in the Middle East theater of operations (most likely Iraq, but I cannot yet confirm that detail).

The wounds are not life-threatening but have him confined to a wheelchair since late December. He hopes to make a full recovery and return to duty in Iraq providing logistical support within five weeks.

If you will, say a prayer for him and other contractors killed or wounded in the line of duty while supporting our military.

Liberal Math

I don't often go after individual bloggers, but statements made yesterday by "dday" at Hullabaloo warrant direct comment.

Discussing a new report that places the number of Iraqi's killed since the start of the war until June of 2006 at roughly 151,000, "dday" wrote:

NPR was trying to spin this as somehow a LOW number of Iraqi civilian casualties in the last three and a half years, because it comes in lower than the Lancet study. But it remains 150,000 human lives, dead, senselessly, for an unnecessary war of choice. And that only goes up to June 2006, and the authors of the study admitted they were unable to reach certain areas that were "too violent."

Not to mention the 3,900-plus soldiers, including 9 in the last two days. And the numbers of wounded are incalculable.

All to remove a dictator who wasn't nearly as efficient at killing Iraqis.

Saddam Hussein "wasn't nearly as efficient at killing Iraqis"? Only in his community-based reality.

Between 70-125 Iraqi civilians were killed per day during Saddam Hussein's reign.

Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power.

That gives us a range of 600,000-1,000,000 civilians killed during Saddam's stewardship, with a median average of 97.5 Iraqi civilians killed per day during his reign, or 780,000. Over 24 years, that is a median average of 32,500 Iraqi civilians per year...

But this isn't a true "apples to apples" comparison, is it?

This does not include military deaths that occurred during Saddam's "unnecessary war of choice" with Iran from 1980-88, which which accounts for roughly one million more lives on both sides, nor casualties sustained as a result of his other "unnecessary war of choice" that resulted from his invasion of Kuwait, where an estimated 100,000+ died during the first Gulf War in 1990-91.

Combining the number of civilians killed by Saddam and number of soldiers killed on all sides during his two "unnecessary wars of choice," and we find a median estimate of 1.88 million killed during his 24-year reign, or 235 people a day.

The Iraq War started on March 20, 2003, and this study ran through June of 2006. In that time, 151,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed, or 126.04 per day.

Add in 10,000 estimated terrorist/insurgent/militia dead and roughly 2762 through that time period Coalition military deaths, and you arrive at a rough total of 163762 total violent deaths, or 136.7 total violent deaths per day through June 2006.

235 violent deaths per day over Saddam's reign including his wars.

137 violent deaths per day in Iraq over the first three years of the present war.

You do the math, and try to paint Saddam's continued reign as a preferable state of affairs.

Air Strikes Hit 40 Targets in Iraqi Offensive

From 2nd BCT, 3rd Inf. Div. PAO, via email press release:

More than 40 targets were hit Jan. 10 after precision air strikes destroyed reported al-Qaeda safe havens in Arab Jabour. Thirty-eight bombs were dropped within the first 10 minutes, with a total tonnage of 40,000 pounds.

The precision air strikes supported Operation Phantom Phoenix, the overarching operation that includes Operation Marne Thunderbolt.

[snip]

Two B-1 Bombers and four F-16 fighter jets, directed bombs at three large target areas. Each bomber made two passes and the F-16s followed to complete the set.

I Wouldn't Get Too Excited...

...over news that Osma Bin Laden's security coordinator was captured in Lahore, Pakistan.

Not because it couldn't happen, but because the source is Pakistan's The Nation, the same news organization that reported the claim last week that Benazir Bhutto was killed by a laser.

As a result, I'd consider their credibility just a wee bit suspect.

Impact?

Channel 4 has new video of the Benazir Bhutto assassination that seems to indicate that the former Prime Minister was indeed hit by the assassin's bullet before she fell back into the car (click Watch this report).

The video, shot from behind Bhutto's vehicle and to the right, shows Bhutto's hair and shawl rise as the pistol discharges for the second time. She drops into the vehicle prior to the suicide bomber detonating. There is nothing in this video to indicate that the first and third shots had any effect.

While the new film shows her hair and shawl moving, however, it is not conclusive.

Unlike the Zapruder-filmed assassination (YouTube) of John F. Kennedy, however, there is not the spray of flesh and bone one might have expected from a pistol blast at near contact range of approximately six feet.

The ballistics expert interviewed by Channel 4, Roger Gray, notes the concussive blast of the bullet hitting her hair and shawl and suggests that it indicates a bullet strike on the left side of Bhutto's head. There were not, however, any direct signs of an invasive impact to Bhutto's skull as seen with Kennedy, just the movement of her hair and shawl. One might think that a bullet hitting Bhutto on the left side of the skull, penetrating, and exiting the right side of her skull would have shown signs of exiting in the form of a spray of blood and bone, which was not evident in the film footage.

So while it is probable that Bhutto was struck by a bullet, it is not conclusive, and the government account of her hitting her head cannot be conclusively ruled out.

Channel 4 was slightly deceptive in their account when they show a sunroof latch from her vehicle and state that there was no sign of blood, implying that the Pakistani government was lying. The government may very well be lying, but the latch they show does not support this; there were two on each side, and Channel 4 is clearly showing the right front latch, while it is the right rear latch that has blood on it and that Bhutto is said to have hit her head on.

It appears everyone is trying to spin the story of Bhutto's assassination for their own advantage, including the media.

Update: Image added.

It is worth noting that if a bullet struck Bhutto a glancing blow and ricocheted away without fully penetrating her skull, that it could possibly leave a wound that would not necessarily look like that of a typical gunshot wound, and instead look something like a blunt force trauma.

If this is the case—and without an autopsy, there are no definitive answers—then the Pakistani government, seeing blood on the rear latch and not seeing evidence of a clear bullet hole, may have incorrectly surmised the cause of death as an impact with the rear sunroof latch as she went down. This is incompetence, but not necessarily a conspiracy to deprive Bhutto of her martyrdom.

In any event, it does not excuse Channel 4 from showing the front sunroof latch and insinuating that there was no blood on any latch, when they clearly took a closeup of the front right latch for their closely-cropped still photo, still in the exact position as shown in the photo above.

Update: AllahPundit's analysis here.

Bhutto Assassinated

A supporter of Pakistan former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto mourns deaths of his colleagues after a suicide attack in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, Thursday, Dec. 27, 2007. Bhutto died Thursday from her injuries sustained in the attack, a party aide said. At least 20 others were killed in the attack.
(AP Photo/B.K.Bangash)

Former Pakistani Prime Minster and Pakistan People's Party leader Benazir Bhutto was assassinated in Rawalpindi, Pakistan today, following a campaign rally at Liaqat Bagh park preceding elections scheduled for January 8.

Members of Bhutto's political party confirmed that Bhutto died in surgery at Rawalpindi General Hospital at 6:16 PM from gunshot wounds to her chest and neck.

At least five shots were fired at Bhutto as she entered her vehicle, and a gunman equipped with a suicide vest blew himself up 50 yards from her vehicle after the shots were fired.

Early reports indicate that at least 20 supporters and police were killed in the blast.

Bhutto led the opposition against Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf.

No group has yet claimed responsibility for the attack.

Developing news and blog coverage of the assassination is being updated at Pajamas Media.

Update: Rioting is expected across Pakistan as a result of Bhutto's death.

Bhutto had been the target of previous assassination attempts from Islamic extremists, and it would be reasonable to assume that they were behind today's attack as well. Some have been quick to also point a finger at jihadi-friendly elements of the Pakistani intelligence community, which seems a reasonable assumption, but at this time it is simply too early to know.

What is certain is that Bhutto's death will throw Pakistani into turmoil, and President Pervez Musharraf now faces the greatest crisis of his Presidency. The January 8 elections now seem in doubt, and missteps by Musharraf could plunge the nuclear-armed country into a possible civil war.

If Musharraf is able to keep the situation from deteriorating to that point, and Islamists are found to be responsible for Bhutto's assassination, he may finally be forced to face the Taliban and al Qaeda-aligned militants in the border regions that terrorists have used as a staging area and base camp since the US-led invasion of Afghanistan, forces he has largely tried to appease or ignore in the past.

Following Bhutto's assassination, it would not be very surprising to see Musharraf finally authorize U.S. forces to make cross border raids into the tribal areas in a push to wipe out known Taliban and al Qaeda strongholds, though this point, it is far too early to tell how the former general and current President will react.

Update: Via Hot Air, it seems al Qaeda is taking responsibility for the attack. This may be Musharraf's best chance to clean out the Taliban and al Qaeda with the support of the Pakistani people. Let's hope his does his nation a favor and does just that.

If At First You Don't Succeed...

Russia is selling a new air defense system to our friends in Tehran:

The new S-300 air defense system signals growing miitary [sic] cooperation between Moscow and Tehran, Iranian Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar said Wednesday.

"The S-300 air defense system will be delivered to Iran on the basis of a contract signed with Russia in the past," state television quoted Najjar as saying.

Najjar didn't say when or how many of the S-300 anti-aircraft missile defense systems would be shipped to Iran.

Earlier this year, Russia delivered 29 Tor-M1 air defense missile systems to Iran under a $700 million contract signed in December 2005.

Russian officials wouldn't comment on the Iranian statement, but the Interfax news agency quoted an unidentified source in the Russian military-industrial complex as saying that a contract for the missiles delivery had been signed several years ago and envisaged the delivery of several dozen S-300 missile systems.

The S-300 is much more powerful and versatile weapon than the Tor-M1 missile systems supplied earlier, which were capable of hitting airborne targets flying at up to 20,000 feet.

The S-300 is capable of shooting down aircraft, cruise missiles and ballistic missile warheads at ranges of up to 95 miles and at altitudes of up to 90,000 feet. Russian military officials boast that it excels the U.S.-built Patriot missiles currently being deployed in Israel.

The announcement comes three months after Israeli strike fighters bombed what some claimed was a nuclear weapons assembly plant in another Soviet client state, Syria.

The Aviation Week blog Ares suggests that the Israelis were able to penetrate the Syrian's Russian-made air defense system with non-steathy F15 and F16 strike fighters by using an airborne network attack system. The US-developed system, called "Suter," may have taken over the state-of-the-art Syrian air defense network, rendering it effectively blind.

While the capabilities of both "Suter" and the Russian air defense systems are classified, there is little reason to believe that the S-300 system is any less prone to being taken over by the airborne attack system than the TOR-1 short-range system already in use by both Syria and Iran.

If this is the case, Iran my be spending millions on an anti-aircraft system that may never see the bombers that kill it.

Another Fake Massacre

This is CNN:

Iraqi soldiers have found a mass grave of mutilated bodies in a restive region north of Baghdad, a local security official told CNN Thursday.

...

Iraqi soldiers said 12 of the bodies found north of Baghdad were beheaded and four others were mutilated. The corpses, all male, were discovered Wednesday near Muqdadiya in Diyala province north of the capital, the official, from Diyala province, said on Thursday.

He said police believe al Qaeda in Iraq left behind the mass grave.

Uh, no.

From Task For Iron's PAO via email:

This appears to false reporting. We currently have no information to confirm this. Neither the Brigade on the ground, or out teams that work with the IA or IPs can confirm this.

This is at least the fifth "massacre of civilians story by al Qaeda" attributed to anonymous police, civilian, or military sources by incurious reporters this year.

A "Tepid" Riot

Terribly Enraged People of Indeterminate Descent (Tepids) have raged through France for the third night now.

Sustaining in excess of more than 80 injuries thus far, including more than 30 officers shot, French police are probably wishing they were somewhere relatively safer right now. Like Baghdad, Ramadi, Fallujah, Tikrit...

AP's Grandstanding on the Hussein Case

Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein was arrested in a terrorist sweep in September of 2006 with Hamid Hamad Motib, a known member of al Qaeda, and another insurgent. Yesterday, it was announced that Hussein will be brought before an investigative magistrate in the Iraqi legal system, and the magistrate will determine whether or not there are grounds to try Hussein under Iraqi law.

AP Associate General Counsel Dave Tomlin made quite a bit of noise in response:

An AP attorney on Monday strongly protested the decision, calling the U.S. military plans a "sham of due process." The journalist, Bilal Hussein, has already been imprisoned without charges for more than 19 months.

And from AP boss Tom Curley:

"While we are hopeful that there could be some resolution to Bilal Hussein's long detention, we have grave concerns that his rights under the law continue to be ignored and even abused," said AP President and CEO Tom Curley.

"The steps the U.S. military is now taking continue to deny Bilal his right to due process and, in turn, may deny him a chance at a fair trial. The treatment of Bilal represents a miscarriage of the very justice and rule of law that the United States is claiming to help Iraq achieve. At this point, we believe the correct recourse is the immediate release of Bilal," Curley added.

These Associated Press officers are taking the infuriating course of trying to spin this case in terms of American law, and not Iraqi law.

As an American military source in Iraq said moments ago:

In the Iraqi system, there is an investigative judge who does the initial work and you can think of it closer terms to a grand jury. Those are not open to the public and that is where indictments are made.

Some of the information is currently classified and as such won't be made public per se, but will be provided at trial, but again, not to the public. Just as in a military court-martial, they are open to the public, but if classified information is to be discussed, it is then closed to the public for that portion. Just like testimony in Congress...there are open and closed sessions.

The biggest issue is the attempts to equate it to our system when it should not be.

Curley and Tomlin, respectively the AP President/CEO and Associate General Counsel, are grandstanding as they try to spin this pending case in t